the democrats would like to take her out. that's a great race to watch. she is a headliner. >> you can take part of the discussion at c-span.org. you can also monitor results while you watch c-span. plenty of coverage to go. paul ryan will be in johnstown, colorado, and this afternoon. we will have live coverage at 3:35 eastern. tonight live coverage of both obama and romney in their f inal rallies.

president obama is wrapping up in des moines, iowa, while mitt romney will be in new hampshire. live coverage starts at 8:00 eastern. a reminder to watch the results in presidential, house, senate, and governors races across the country. victory and concession speeches from candidates, plus your reaction to route the night, and it begins at 8:00 eastern tomorrow night on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org c- span.org. >> when you have the infrastructure, there are quality vulnerabilities to natural disasters. in terms of the fcc's engagement, the chairman spent the night at the agency. our public safety person to the state. we are working on firsthand with fema to make an overall assessment in terms of those

initial numbers. of 25% of cell towers were disabled during this process. what the fcc does and will continue to do is to work with these entities to assess the situation on the ground and to more so used this information to see what we can do better going forward. gnon clybrun, tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. >> and look now at the defects edia.cial m benill heear from rattray. this is just over 45 minutes.

>> ben rattray is the -- >> thank you. not exist 10 years ago and is now growing at a rapid pace. he is a graduate of stanford university. ben rattray has been listed in time magazine's 100 most influential people in the world congratulations on that, certainly. let us start with this before we talk about the details in the room. a lot of people not fully aware of the platform you've created. talk about what you created, what you did, and how it has evolved. >> great to be here. thank you. i initially wanted to be an investment banker. my senior year, i go home, and one of my other younger brothers says he is gay. he said the thing that was most painful for him was not people

that were explicitly anti-gay, but the people that refuse to stand up against them. i reflected about what i wanted to do with my life. i went from the track of wanting to be an investment banker to getting involved in social change. after a number of years, reading many books, experiencing power in washington, i started to organize petitions formed to organize around issues people care about. we started this in 2007 and failed for 2.5 years. over the past year and half, things have taken off. more than 20 million members around the world. if i were to identify a one thing that the differentiation between when we failed and now is specificity. social justice movements,

historically over the past few decades there is an inclination for big national or global movements in change. when to stop global warming, advance gay-rights. while those are laudable aims, there is not a lot of specific action you could take that is effective. we changed starting with the oldest tool, the petitions. this is very small, incremental change. that is spreading like wildfire. >> people use the site to do what? to post petitions? >> exactly. it is just a petition site. it now has the tools to take the people who signed the petitions and mobilize them. these are very specific. literally three fields. what you want to change in who has the power to change it, and why should people join you?

20,000 that started. many of them go by road. -- go viral. coalesce into the idea of petitions? how did you focus in on petitions? >> initially was using the web to organize people around, and objectives. this started in 2005. i was in washington, d.c., and disenchanted with a first experience in government. i was doing government consulting for education companies. i got involved with the website and you see the capacity for people to come together around personal interest. the same technology can be used to organize people by the issues they care about. it is very historic structural dilemma where it is extremely

expensive for the time to organize people. by virtue of that, you have objectives that are oftentimes less powerful. idea. people to organize. it was only after many different experiences we found there was incremental change that was most effective way to win the campaign. >> shift to the paradigm. historically one of the greatest expenses and politics is finding people who agree with you. i think about how common cause was founded. they took up a full page in "the new york times" to raise money. moveon.org, the internet flips the paradigm where people who agree with you can find you. they can find you essentially

no cost. it grows exponentially faster. it is the twist here that people agree with -- in other words, if you went out and sifted through the great mass of america to find the people who agree with you, expensive. but the internet makes it possible to turn that around. it makes it possible to reach not just an individual, but hundreds of thousands of people in real time. it would have been not just really expensive to do -- you would have to raise -- one of my favorite campaigns over the past few months related to the presidential election is there are three 16- year-old girls in new jersey in a civics class, and they find out there has not a female moderator of president of debates in 10 years.

they start a petition to accept a female moderator. they get 170,000 people to join. they go in front of the debate commission and get huge amounts of press on fox news or cnn or what have you. if you had calculated the expense that would be required to pay for the campaign in the media, millions of dollars. it is exciting that can happen at any time and from any individual. >> what has been the most successful campaign so far? >> the campaign that inspired us to give it from the very broad objective was the incredible campaign about a year and a half ago in south africa.

a huge global explosion of campaigns for change. a woman walking down the street, and she gets grabbed and thrown into a shack and raped and almost killed. they said she was a lesbian woman and the man was trying to turn her straight. awful thing, collectively. a good friend sees this and starts a petition and ask the minister of justice to take issue seriously. 180,000 people take action. a huge overall media exposure. after about a month of campaigning, that government apologizes and parliament passes a bill to have a task force to investigate the issue. it is an amazing demonstration of people power. >> what has had the biggest impact in the u.s.? >> one of the most powerful campaigns was the trayvon

martin case. a 17-year-old african-american, killed in florida, tragically. two weeks after the incident, there was no media coverage of all. a private injustice. the parents start a petition, and then it goes viral. the importance is not just the individual acts of arresting his killer in prosecuting him, but the public. the result, the awareness of the tragic situation of young african-americans not being treated fairly in the justice system or the "stand your ground" laws, where you can almost impunitively shoot someone. that is some of the really exciting things we see. >> in trayvon martin's case, clearly there was an impact,

but they were not waiting. they were in there pretty soon, on the case. what i want to ask you -- do you find a difference in the way that companies -- you have a lot of petitions aimed at companies that do specific things. obviously, some have had more political implications. is there a difference in response between business institutions and political institutions? >> politicians are much less responsive. it is easier to change your detergent than your congressman. i tell that to my congressman. brands are in commodity marketplaces, where public perception is the biggest value they have. if you start to attack that on twitter and facebook, they are

very sensitive. they have many more staff dedicated to observing the sentiments of social media. they are much more responsive. whereas politicians are often lagging in engagement in social media for actual policy. not just pushing content, but engaging. >> from the point of view of companies, i can see how they might be responsive to a campaign about the attributes of a product, like whether they are using biodegradable cups. you can imagine something like the chick-fil-a controversy. dozens of users mobilized, saying, stop contributing to groups hostile to gay rights. ralph reed organized tens of thousands of people to send e- mails on the other side, from the faith and freedom coalition. and does the capacity to organize dilute the inherent

polarization in any way? or does it provide another battlefield in which it plays out? >> there are so many battles that are not partisan debates, that are not 50/50, underlying things that are not cultural battles. there is actually a bill about to pass in congress. it used to be the case that it is legal for rental car companies to not return recalled cars. they can have cars that are dangerous. enterprise and hertz got a loophole in a transportation bill. in 2004, two girls who rented a pt cruiser, it flames out and they both died. their mom ends up having a civil lawsuit for the next eight years, and wins. but the law did not change, still had not changed. it is only after she starts a

petition on the site and embarrasses enterprise, and is going to be on "the today show," that enterprise changes the policy. that is not controversial. there are orders of magnitude more than you see. >> as you say, you have evolved from the broad global to the more specific and local. but i have seen you say something to the effect that we want to move from moments to movements. are you comfortable with where you are? the more tangible, the more narrow, the bigger the impact you can have. is that where you envision this in seven years? or would you be disappointed if you are not making the circle back to figuring out how to influence broader issues? >> we look at the trajectory of social movements. you end up starting small. lbj, in the context of no

organizers, passes the civil rights act. you refused to sit in the back of the bus. you went incrementally, from families to cities to country. that is the kind of tools we want to build, to start a foothold of local change, and aggregate across the country. a small example is an attempted movement around ending plastic bags in america, by virtue of increasing a tax. >> i have seen it in bethesda, maryland. >> it is a change in individual cities. you win nationally by winning locally. a 13-year-old girl with an eighth grade project started a campaign asking her hometown to pass a plastic bag tax. the plastics industry gets a state law passed in the state of illinois to make it illegal to pass local plastic bag taxes. she responds to petition the

governor of the state to veto the bill. after getting more than 100,000 people to join, the governor calls her on her home phone line about a month ago, says, "i am going to veto the bill." in response, all these young girls are starting campaigns around the country, in their towns, trying to pass plastic bag taxes. you win hundreds of small victories, but you start with one. >> you were describing it as aggregating. but do you see a way to tackle some of the bigger issues you would be concerned about? how does this translate into climate change, to take one example? how would this platform ultimately, three years from now, if president obama wins a second term, 2013 on the table -- can you influence debates like that?

>> we do not take official positions on policies, but i will give you an example on climate change. i would bet that instead of a large national campaign -- congress does not make decisions. members of congress make decisions. all politics is local. instead of a large campaign around congress, if you have 435 13-year-old girls start local campaigns, you have a different campaign. another example on immigration is happening already. this pitched partisan battle on immigration exists at a national level. if you look at the way policy impacts real lives, it changes minds. we have kids that will start petitions in defense of their friends who are going to be deported to countries they have never known. there are tens of thousands that graduate high school every year. there is a case where a kid who

was brought into the country at age 2, his dad dies, his mom is in a mental asylum -- he is hugely successful. only when he goes to pay a parking ticket, right before going to college, does he find out he was undocumented. he is deported to the country he never knew. he does not speak spanish. should that person be deported? you have a different argument than illegal immigrants. incrimentally, there is a broader movement for national change. >> you mentioned the causes are not ideological, but many start on the center and move to the left, in terms of the biggest priorities. is there a conservative analog? >> we are seeing more and more conservative campaigns. a lot of the campaigns on

corporate accountability are started by conservatives. we engage with petition creators when they start viral petitions. the company target ends up, about a week before thanksgiving last year, announced that all their workers, for the first time, are going to have to work on thanksgiving. there is a worker in kansas who starts a petition. gets 150,000 people to join, condemning target for being anti-family. this is a ron paul supporter. she thought it just seemed wrong. this campaign around enterprise cars -- the loophole in the transportation bill seems wrong. these are non-partisan campaigns. >> we saw a petition to boycott amazon because jeff bezos supported the gay marriage amendment in washington state. >> it is like youtube, an open

platform. most campaigns are about changing the status quo. it tends toward social justice. but it is certainly the case -- look at chick-fil-a. they were such asking for universities to revoke their right to sell because they fund anti-gay movements. there were opposite campaigns, asking universities to affirm the free-speech rights. what you find is campaigns that are building people up, that seem just, they resonate with moral value. things that seem to be regressive cannot be shared as virally. >> two things are happening. we are more networked than ever.

the ability of an individual to communicate -- mass communication without mass media, available almost to individuals. we are more connected than ever. on the other hand, politically, we are as polarized as ever. highest level of party-line voting in congress since the late 19th century. it is possible barack obama will win 80% of non-white votes and only 40% of whites. the gap with the opposite party is the widest it has ever been, and more so every election. do you think the networking technology is a force that is knitting together and bridging our differences, or one that is polarizing? >> it has the capacity for either. as you have increasing networks that are run from groups,

filtering out the things you do not believe, filtering in only things that affirm your prejudices -- that is a trend. the other trend is transcending politics through storytelling. the divisiveness around immigration, not building people up, but dividing people against each other. when you hear how politics affect local people, you have a greater social support. this is not a national debate that divides people. it is what is happening locally, in real communities, on a daily basis. there tends to be more agreement on local change than national change. >> on a local level, it transcends difference? >> there are things that are more personal, like saving a local park or a teacher that was fired for being gay. there was a huge partisan battle around the employment

nondiscrimination act, which gives nondiscrimination policy for gay and lesbian americans. in 29 states in the country, you can be fired for being gay. there was a campaign a year ago where a teacher in oregon was fired for being gay. the parents were outraged. they campaigned. hundreds protested. the superintendent apologised and gave the job back. when you asked those people in the abstract whether they supported special policies for lesbian and gay americans, would not have supported them. in their community, there is more support. >> not that you are responsible. as you look at the centrifugal and centripetal forces at work, in the long run, are we on a trajectory to become more united or more divided? >> i think more united. it is a time of solidarity, and

insight into the way other people experience life. it is not how policy happens in the abstract, but individual experiences. that is the trajectory of social justice movements and the individual expansion of rights, fairness, and justice, expanding over the last 200 years, and accelerating. the rights in america is a great example. many think it is the civil rights movement of our time. there is an incredible rapidity of empathy, in the sense of shared consciousness. you have overwhelming support now, especially among young people. it shows that people, when there is storytelling and shared information, he can to have greater empathy and solidarity. >> how do you keep the doors open? what is the finance? >> my mom. >> what is the financial model

that allows this to go? >> we allow nonprofits to connect to people. they sponsor petitions and videos. someone comes onto the site and shares something about environmental sustainability. the sierra club might be featured as a sponsoring a petition. they pay for advertising. >> how big is that? >> 150 staff around the world. we have 20 million members. it is all about scale. the internet is all about massive scale. the number of people we should be able to mobilize, an order of magnitude. it is not necessarily better. this is the exponential growth of the internet. that is the cause of historical change, because of that rapid expansion.

we have more members, able to generate more revenue. >> we are heading toward, if we have not passed, a billion dollars spent on presidential advertising. most of it going to nine states, 6% of the population. it would have been cheaper to buy every undecided voter in ohio a television at this point. here is mitt romney with a 40 inch plasma. appreciate your consideration. we are talking about congress and responding. what about the way it -- do you think the balance of the way that we communicate in the race for president, which is, along with the super bowl, one of our big civic activities -- do you think the balance is going to shift? do you reach individuals online, or use this carpet- bombing television approach?

>> in maybe 2028. i see the destruction. -- disruptions. individuals cannot care about disruption. you have to expose a message to many people in a convincing matter. if you get enough people to do that on your behalf, it is as valuable, if not more so. a billion dollars seems like a lot of money. but if you can aggregate the connections of 300 million people talking amongst each other about candidates, the value is much greater. if you have aggregation of social media, the capacity for people to receive information through friends instead of mainstream broadcasts, you are going to undermine the value of every dollar and increase the value of personal relationships. it may not happen tomorrow or in four years, but that is where we are headed. facilitating content through those networks will be more influential. horizontal communication, as

opposed to the vertical coming down the track. money goes from all over the country into the campaign headquarters. what comes back up is television ads. kind of a triangle. you are talking about mobilizing people to communicate across horizontal networks. >> there is more money going into that each campaign. but they are still betting the most heavily on the old tools. >> it is just the early stages. you used to have a specific opinion and propagate that, circumscribed by the geographic for some of the. -- geographic proximity. now, it is propagated across twitter or facebook. most of my friends, certainly my younger brother, are consuming, content through facebook or twitter. that is not just mainstream media. it is produced by friends of theirs. that increases horizontally, friends of friends.

that destabilizes the traditional top-down communication, and undermines the value of an incremental dollar for the campaign. it increases the value of people. >> watching my younger son consume media, a great investment for obama would be to invest in ads in surf videos. to what extent is all of this the preserve of an upper- middle-class, college-educated slice of society? is what is happening here truly engaging all americans? is it a way one slice is finding more like-minded folks, but not reaching beyond? >> this is one of the things we are excited and surprised about. empowering the least powerful. the biggest differentiation are

those that had no voice. the most consistent example is foreclosures. a huge number of campaigns, local campaigns, of people kicked out of their homes. they cannot reach the loan officer of the bank. by embarrassing the local bank, they get media awareness and stay in their home. these are the most downtrodden people. the second is immigration, people who are not even legally in this country, not documented, who are able to start campaigns on their behalf or the behalf of their friends. >> ultimately, you are not going to be able to launch a campaign on behalf of millions of people facing foreclosure. that has to be dealt with by some kind of policy, if at all. your view is you are building awareness, case by case, that ultimately translates into

system alteration. -- systemic action? >> if people realize that foreclosure is not about people who are irresponsible, who should know better, but see the real people who are affected -- clearly, in some cases, in just circumstances. it chips away at the whole suspicion of irresponsible homeowners. >> questions from the audience. if you could identify yourself? >> my name is barry. i am wondering what restrictions you may place on the petition campaigns. what about the problem of vigilantes? to give you an example, let us say a couple of us decided that diane sawyer was ruining abc news because she had moved to to different journalism. would you accept that? >> anybody can start a petition. what you can to find is the kind of petitions that expand

resonate in a deep way with a large group of people. they tend not to be divisive and hateful, things you might be skeptical of. in some situations, there will be petitions that are dubious. they are flagged, almost always, by the community, and often removed. the campaigns that have expanded are positive social change that many people resonate with. -- people agree with. >> i would give you the microphone. please of identify yourself. >> i am danielle weiss. i had never heard of you before. how does your website interact with the international community? for someone like myself, i am just curious what the overall picture is. do you map out the hot topics? is it a real dialogue?

>> we just hired in about 15 countries. more than a million new members a month are joining the site. groups that did not have much online activity -- india is a great example. immense numbers of victories in india, particularly around corruption campaigns. individual officers requesting bribes are being exposed and given censure. the magnitude of needed improvement of justice is much greater internationally than in the united states. >> do you capture information from people? >> at most, the post code or zip code. then, we are able to target people. >> do you find somebody else who wants to do an environmental petition? >> just like with amazon, if

someone is interested, we personalize recommendations for campaigns. >> do the campaigns buy that from you? >> no. people can pay to sponsor campaigns. if you are featured on the site, it is a sponsored petition. >> we see you you signed petitions on recycling. here is one that might be interesting. >> absolutely. >> have you discovered a class of people that are habitual? who has signed the most petitions? >> thousands. some people go crazy. the increase in likelihood of signing a petition is after experiencing a victory.

historically, there has not been a lot of demonstrated impact. the reason is very large movements around getting president obama to stop climate change. very difficult to do. local victories, people recognize the capacity to make a difference. >> there must be issues people wanted raised in the presidential debate. >> there were a lot of those. mostly, petitions are related to things like incremental change. both of these campaigns are winning and running, even in congress -- there is a recent bill around military veterans and having clean water on a bunch of bases. it is less sexy, but change is happening on a local level. there are small campaigns on the internet. >> another question in the back-middle, and then we will

come up here. >> you mentioned your early days. seemed inspiring. could you elaborate on the first two or three years, and how you got through that his failure to success? how did you finance that? how big was your team? how did that go? >> that is a good question. depressed. i started with a good friend of mine, a tech guy, doing everything, and i was the ideas guy. a lot easier job. it was just the two of us. then a guy from northwestern, a friend of ours. it was the three of us, the first three years. what you do is to iterate. you launch a product. you see the response. you look at the numbers on google analytics. you shift and build additional features. we built almost everything. social fundraising. none of it worked. it was after we peeled back

those different features that we figured it out. the most determining factor -- this is the case for almost any venture, but especially the internet. it is relentless determination. it is the accelerator program. this is looking at large consumer internet sites. the biggest factor in the success of the team is the relentless determination to do whatever is necessary to succeed. we should never, ever give up. >> hold on. you need a microphone. over here.

>> nancy. i have a quick high-tech question for you, concerning relentless petitions. every time i go to a supermarket or target, there is always someone with a cause and a petition. sometimes, i am interested. sometimes, i do not have the time. have you thought of coming up with an app? you can walk out and say, "i will text your app." just to avoid confrontation and that kind of negative interaction. >> our goal is to reduce the barriers of civic participation. the big part of that is mobile. we just hired engineers to work on that. not only will there be up petition. you would walk into a target and could automatically see any campaigns that are targeting the company that time. supply chain management. policies are on worker rights. you would be able to join

immediately, in real time, based on where you are. >> a microphone is coming up to you. >> hello. fred powell. potential disaggregation applies to energy and medicine. the affordable care act is being challenged because that represented a disaggregation of supplying the services. solar energy, we have a massive delivery system. what do you do when you try to disaggregate? >> there is almost nobody whose toes we do not step on. you have a status quo. all the campaigns are either

going to be offending or undermining the power structure of some entity. the question is how you change incentives. how do you make it painful enough for people, in stepping on their toes, to make them change and step back? we do not aim to be confrontational because we want to be antagonists. we aim for power everywhere, changing all of these entrenched interests. on the corporate side in particular, you end up seeing companies -- this is a great example, around jamba juice. the country uses styrofoam cups. a girl is a big fan. she loves the juice, but hates styrofoam. in some ways, the campaign frustrates jamba juice.

others are glad there is the impetus to encourage them to do what many in the company already wanted to do. it gives them the agency to go to shareholders and make this public commitment that might be expensive, but they can justify based on pressure. >> for brands especially with the youth audience, you can see how they would be receptive to visible changes. do you think this platform could convince apple to drop foxconn? >> there is a huge campaign around the somewhat dubious npr coverage around the workers' rights. it's notable. it started from a virginia man. more than 200,000 people joined a forecast and protest. there was this underlying idea of the lack of a good pay.

in hourly wages. there was a material reasoned. -- reason. it used to be the case that you consider around a board room and be pretty confident that most decisions you made were in obscurity and there are things you were doing would undermine things in places people have never even heard about. when you are sitting around a board room, you must assume two famous. -- two things. every decision you make is going to be transparent and there will be a group of customers that will fight you told ito. -- fight you toe to toe. if you cannot justify it in public, it's a very justifiable. >> previously, the parties of

the dialogue was by anyone who had a public platform to shape of the dialogue. communication without the mass media. they're now moving through a medium like this of the individuals. the idea that an individual could speak to 100,000 people, who could do that before? the ability to talk to large numbers of people and get an idea is really democratizing. at the top. >> i want to follow-up with your question on foxfonn. people are working perhaps the

first important job in their life and their sustaining themselves in the race that they make. why is mcdonald's in africa? i hear that it's the only nutritious, clean meal they can get. while we need to change practices, i agree. we may not want to go so far as to stop by people from working with foxconn. >> that's a valid point. we do not take an official position. we encourage them to engage in public dialogue. mayor bloomberg made a comment about the difficulty of governing in the context of social media where every idea is transparent.

we are and accountability- demanding body of citizens around the world. i have to make a public argument. >> the ability to organize does not change the distribution. it allows it to be more focused. ultimately come in the challenger on so many of these issues is finding a consensus for change that goes beyond. part of the challenges you make it easier for each tried to organize and be heard to amplify, your word, it's a voice. -- its voice. does that get you closer work further away to some portion of the other tried? >> i will give an example. most issues, not the ones we talked about at a national local, but most of them are not that divisive.

corporate accountability, one of the most exploited is the flower piggie industry. -- flower picking industry. it is a double digit percentage of women who are pregnant while picking flowers. this and not something most people want. they recognize it is the wrong. to do. fair trade is the necessary next step. they want to except fair trade flowers. 24 hours later they made a 100- degree turn. even people who were out at 1- 800-flowers they recognized was the right thing to do. they just dismissive. -- they just dismissed it.

there are so many more examples. >> bloomberg is talking about the ability to organize in opposition to what ever it is. >> is a petition urging whoever wins to deal with the deficit down the fiscal close. it probably would not take off. >> there is a personal motive component. it is the cases of a minority of people, for those who do not have equal rights, the issues of immigration are a great issue. >> it's been a great conversation. thank you for joining me, ben rattray. larry will take you want to the next conversation.

that was terrific. thank you very much. >> paul ryan will be in colorado this afternoon as we continue to bring you coverage of the presidential race. we will have coverage at 3:35 p.m. eastern on c-span. tonight we will have live coverage as both obama and romney will hold their final campaign raw -- rallies. they will start just at 7:00 eastern. mr. romney will be in new hampshire. live campaigned night coverage will start at 8:00 eastern. we just asked journalists what they will be watching for on election night. here is what they had to say. >> the presidential race, starting with the first poll closing time at 6:00 in indiana. they expect mitt romney will be winning indiana.

did you move to 7:00 with virginia and 7:30 with ohio. that will lay the foundation for what kind of election people have and whether democrats will have an advantage, republicans have an advantage, or it is going to be a status quo election where it will be just district by district and state by state. >> are their states or districts that you are watching for? >> when it comes to the house it is helpful to look at states as a whole. looking at new york, a state where democrats need to do very well. they need to take at least five seats. they may not get any, and part of the challenges they might defeat one member of congress, but they also may lose one member, so if that happens, all they have done is exchange seat and have not started to getting ahead to the 25-seat gain they

need. looking at illinois, a place where democrats were in control of the redistricting process, and they need to maximize their gains there. they will probably take need to get at least five seats. if they pick up 3, 4, or five, it has been more expensive than they expected and that money could not go to other races in the country where they could target rick hubble -- republicans. california there have been two factors, which was to turn the congressional map on its head. we are almost able to ignore california even though it is the biggest day, and maybe watch one or two seats. now we're watching a dozen seats to see which party takes control. when it comes to the senate, if you look at the northern part of the country, if you look at montana, north dakota, indiana, and wisconsin, all four of those

races are in our categories, and republicans need to win all four of them if they have any hope of getting the majority. in each one of those that they lose, the chance the republicans will gain back control decreases for the perry >> will there be anything that surprise you? our job is toj avoid as many surprises as process. in hopes of we will avoid a surprise, but i would be surprised if there is not a surprise, particularly on the house side. the presidential battleground, i think the senate battle ground, states we know come on the house side, but almost expect there to be a surprise, because it is still a volatile electorate, and one thing we learned from the primaries is that some of these members are not taking their reelection seriously. i expect there will be a couple members double caught by

surprise and we will take everyone else by surprise, but i expect there to be some members that are not i am our list, because the parties are not pulling in every single district. they are pulling in the most competitive districts, and at the next level out. the only way to know to catch a surprise is that data to say that the surprises coming. >> the same course we have been on will not lead to a better destination. it means tripling of unemployment. it means stagnant take-home pay, to press home values, a devastated military, and unless we change course we may be looking at another recession. the question of this election comes down to this -- do you want more of the same or do you want real change?

>> know what changed looks like and what governor romney is selling ain't it. giving power to the biggest banks is not changed. another tax cut for the wealthy is not change. refusing to answer questions about the details in their policies until after the election, that is definitely not change. ruling out a compromise by pledging a rubber stamp to the tea party folks in congress -- that is not changed. changing the facts whether it inconvenient to your campaign, not change. >> tuesday night watch election coverage on c-span, with obama from chicago and romney in boston. watch key house and senate victory and concession speeches, and to wrap the -- and throughout the night, watch c- span, c-span rio, and c-

span.org. >> two advisors to the presidential campaigns. this discussion is hosted by the national association of business economics. >> good afternoon, and welcome to the economic debate he doesn't cut. simonson. kien this educational forum is party by nabe. founded in 1919 -- 1959, nabe is an organization for others use economics in the workplace. this event is the fourth in a series of policy debates we began here at the national press

club in 2007. among our other policy-related initiatives, are our annual meeting in new york next month and an economic policy conference in washington and our semiannual economic policy survey. we released the results of the latest survey today, and have posted a full copy on our website, www.nabe.com, and have hard copies available for those of you here at the national press club. the survey provides a summary of a panel of 236 members use on current fiscal, monetary, health care policy and european debt situation. trent us as partners for this and that are fidelity investments, represented here by our board member who will make closing remarks and another. these organizations joined with us and the national economists club in our effort to provide an economic policy for for the

presidential campaign economic advisers. we hope today's the event will broaden understanding of the proposals with a depth that we can provide. you can call to participate live by way of twitter. #nabedeabate. let me introduce our panel us. biographies are available at our website. it is an honor and privilege to turn the program over to our moderators, judy woodruff and david wessel.

david is known to millions of listeners and through his even of intelligent writing. t.d. and david, it is all yours. >> you should have made the introductions longer. >> thank you. david and i are delighted to be here. there are seven issues people are interested in, but none more important than the economy, and that is why both of us are delighted. we're thrilled to take part in this debate. the election is only 42 days away, and with every day more questions popped up and the more the public wants answers, and the candidate debates start next week, i think our opera dundee today talk with these economic advisers cannot be more timely. i'd will start by asking -- i will start asking the question

and david will come after that, and we will go back and forth, and we will see where it goes. the will go for about 45 minutes and then we will look to the audience for you to ask questions. let's start with jobs. why does your candidate believe that this economy is not creating more jobs and what would he do to change that to make things better? >> we just came through the deepest recession since the great depression. we were losing 800,000 jobs a month. we have been working our way back. we have added 4.6 million private sector jobs of the last 30 months, but the economy is not growing fast enough. the primary reason for that

continues to be insufficient aggregate demand. if you ask employers whether not they are hiring, the answer they give in surveys is consistently they are not expecting -- they're not sure consumers will be there for next year. if you do not know that, are not going to be hiring people or building new factories. what we need to be doing now is doing further things to get the economy growing faster, and the president has proposed the american jobs act, which would provide small businesses with tax credits for new workers. it would put construction workers back to work, rebuilding highways and runways and bridges. it would prevent the office -- layoffs of teachers and firefighters, and it would make

homeowners who have not been able to refinance debt able to do so. economists said if these policies were enacted, it would add a million jobs to de economy. on top of that, mitt romney and paul ryan propose an excessive budget cuts for next year that would suck 1 million jobs out of the economy when we need to keep the economy going. the president's plan at a million jobs. there is a 2 million jobs difference in the canada's between what would happen next year. >> kevin, how would you answer that question? >> there is no question that job creation, we would agree job creation is absolutely unacceptable. looking at things like the unemployment rate only tells a little bit of the story.

this decline in the fraction of the population that is employed is the biggest policy challenge facing americans in my lifetime. we have had foreign policy challenges, and nobody asks me about four policy. it is the biggest challenge create there are contrasting views about what to do, and i think that let's talk about the big picture, which is why is it that jobs are not being created, and the first is we have got insufficient demand. as we saw in just answer and as we have seen in president obama's policies, we had a demand curve and a supply curve, and the president's position has been radical. i think is floyd -- both and we need to balance posses with

policies that defect supply. you might be pessimistic about the future, we have dissipates that are the u.s. was the third worst, and the only others that are worse art new zealand and japan. if you see a situation like that, it is right for people to be anxious about the future. if businesses paid 10% of the shortfall for the deficit going forward, they would have a negative net work right now. you are not fun to see a big expansion of supply, and you will not that the expansion of the man. romney is proposing fiscal consolidation that repairs entitlements, airport rate so we

are no longer the highest. there are two places that are less friendly and that is guyana and the condo. if used on the globe, you would hit a country that was a more attractive place for us. the president thinks we can ignore those things. the governor disagrees. maybe we get to respond -- >> we will get into the other questions about tax policy, but on what you said about jobs, the spot to the point that the president has the only focus on the demand side. >> that is not true at all. from day one, while he was dealing with the most serious financial and economic crisis in a generation, he started working on controlling health-care costs and doing the reform bill that has set the stage for a no

health care cost growth. he created that deficit reduction commission to start the process of getting us toward make the reductions we need to do, and he put forward a deficit reduction plan last year, working with congress. he pass $1 trillion in spending cuts. there is a big contrast to the president's specific plan to bring down the deficit and bring it down in a balanced way. that is a balanced approach just like the bulls since the commission fallen. . .

>> they said that we will pay for it later. >> we will get into all of that, we hope, in the minutes to come. respond to that point about jobs. >> this is something that i think needs to be more clear in this campaign. , romney has a very detailed plan -- medicare, medicaid, so security reform -- if you looked at the assertion that president obama makes things ed up, i that

is the biggest fraud in american politics. they are waving around a $4 trillion budget. it went to the floor of the house and was defeated 414-0. in the senate it was defeated 99-0. it was said to be filled with phantom savings. there is $1 trillion in there because of the peace dividend for a war that the president does not continue to fight in iraq and of kasten. i wondered why they did not make a $10 trillion. if you look at the other phantom savings, there's all sorts of things like interest rate savings and so on. there is no spending cuts at all and this is accepted by every budget analyst. the thing that makes me angry about what he just said is that he mentions the president paused stimulus plan from last year.

the president's position is that what we need to do is invest more in the shovel-ready project. they financed the money would that stimulus is from the peace dividend. you cannot have the stimulus and the $4 trillion savings at the same time. david knows this is true. >> judy asked about the jobs. she got the answer to my question so i will try her question. he started by saying it is obvious that everybody knows there is an aggregate demand problem and supply problem. what is the romney approach the -- to the aggregate demand problem. >> the approach is to have something from the tax side to broaden the base and lower the rates. a survey of economists

suggested that and $86 reform would do the trick. i think that might be high. it is at least in the ballpark. >> that will increase demand? >> absolutely, it will lower the marginal rates and made people more optimistic about the future and feel wealthier and increased consumption. on the corporate side, governor romney has proposed a 25% cut which is less than what i would like. if a u.s. firm wants to locate investments and business capital in the u.s., in detroit for example, they paid the highest tax but they want to located in any other country on the globe, they pay a lower rate. if we do is that right to 25% without the phantom tax increases, that would absolutely

drive up capital spending in the country. there is not a business economist in this room -- the first group i joined after graduate school was the nabe - if you cut the corporate rate, you would get spending in the u.s.. >> what role does the tax code play in aggregate demand? >> when consumers have more money in their pockets, they spend more. it depends which consumers they are. there are different estimates about which faction those in their pocket. they also look for and i also know the tax cuts will not be sustained because they will be lead to large deficits. >> what is the m obama after to inadequate demand? >> there's also something called monetary policy and ben bernanke

has said that we have an unemployment rate that is way too high and he has proposed a way that he thinks would at least address this at the margins. do you think he is doing a good job and that this latest thing is in support of the economic growth and demand? >> there is very strong evidence that countries that have independent federal reserve have a better economic performance. there is a strong tradition in this country that people on campaigns or associated with the executive branch don't comment on specific monetary actions of the fed. i would say i don't think it has been helpful at all for the congressional republicans and paul ryan to intimidate the fed.

>> i think there is a difference between politicizing and having an honest policy debate. the federal reserve's actions and i of known ben bernanke for a long time and thought of him as a friend, i understand where he is coming from and i believe what he is doing is the right thing but i think the fed policy actions have exposed to an enormous amount of risk with very little upside. i think it is almost patriotic to have a policy debate about whether it is a good idea to do what he is doing. you have to think about what happens with the fed next and i can honestly say that if you are trying to think about who should be the fed chairman after ben bernanke, the only person i can think of is david copperfield. if you don't get fiscal policy in control than the fed's job is

impossible. fiscal policy has not been under control for the last four years. fiscal policy right now is not in control. jeff mentioned to the uncertainty and large deficits can suppress aggregate demand. in that kind of environment, the fed has an impossible job to do. the big expansion of the fed and the specifics about what that is misguided, one has to begin with take alternate that the fed is in an impossible situation. because the fiscal policy is broken. >> let's get back to texas. did i understand -- what was your answer to the question about cutting the tax rate and whether that will grow capital spending and the bus grow jobs? what was your response? >> the president has proposed cutting the corporate tax rate to 20 eight%.

on like governor romney, he said there are 10 ways you can pay for this. there is no doubt that a lower corporate tax rate is paid for and revenue neutral and that would be good for the economy. tax cuts that are not paid for and drive up the deficit are almost certainly bad for the economy. >> why? >> because higher deficits crowd out capital formation and do more damage than any positive effects from the lower marginal rate them. >> right now, taxes to gdp are really low right now. that is why we have big deficits. corporate revenue to gdp is about as low as it has ever been. it is so low because we have

this high tax rate compared to the rest of the world everybody can avoid it by creating jobs overseas and that's what they are doing. there is not corporate taxable revenue in the u.s. the president's plan has been -- has had some moving pieces. it is a net tax increase because they and early and cut the rates 28% said the president's position is we should start and a position where we are on the wrong side and have the lowest corporate rabin note to gdp. the way to address that is to increase taxes and we rejected that view. >> i did hear the governor romney interview last night and he made the distinction between upper income andand hal upper income would not see their taxes change overall. he talked about closing

loopholes but did not go into specifics. he said middle income folks would not see their rates go up. help us understand what the dividing line is between middle and upper income? >> i am not a psychic. it is not a conversation i have had. >> are we talking $100,000? >> in the income tax, it is mostly paid by the top that of the income distribution. people who itemize tend to be wealthier than people who don't. if you haven't $86 reform, you eliminate tax expenditures and lower rates. in a way that can improve people's lives. i know governor romney has been criticized for not offering exactly which things he will

reduce. if you look of the tax literature, there are different proposals. there are a lot of places to start a negotiation that would lead to an $86 reform. that was a very bipartisan thing back in the 1980's. >> mitt romney has been very specific about the fact that it wants to give $5 trillion in tax cuts that our country cannot afford including $250,000 to each millionaire after he extends the full best tax cuts. -- the full bush tax cuts. he has not named a single tax expenditure he will get rid of to pay for those. he simply says after the election we will figure it out. the tax policy center looked at this and added up the tax expenditures out there except for the ones on capitol that mitt romney said he would not get rid of. they said if you got rid of all

of those, you could not pay for them without raising taxes on people below $200,000. that is the answer to the question he gave last week under the division of the middle-class and upper-class is. the men from the plan will massively increase the deficit or if it is revenue neutral, will raise taxes on middle class. it has been entertaining to watch the romney campaign react to the tax policy center study. the first thing they did is said the study left that economic growth but it turned out they had inc. economic growth. -- they had inc. economic growth. then they put kevin on a conference call and he said the best estimate was that the plan

would raise gdp by 1%. there is an $86 billion fall even if you get rid of all the tax expenditures which no one is proposing. there is this $86 billion hole. even when you incorporate economic growth, you have a problem. they pointed out that that does not work so i got marty feldstein at harvard and princeton to look at the issue might put out studies that are supporting the romney plan but those proposals showed you had to raise taxes down to $100,000 and eliminate all the tax expenditures. 100% of the home mortgage deductions at that level to pay for his plan. the numbers don't add up in the romney plan.

>> can i respond to that? first of all, the tax policy center plan is the most partisan thing that has come out of a think attack in my life. i got the study at 9:15 in the morning and 11:00 that same morning it was in obama's speech in the next day it was in presidential adds. once they decided that romney had a deficit shortfall, they made an assumption about a tax increase with people with low incomes. the fact is, the notion that governor romney ever said anything that would support increasing taxes by $2,000 is a

lie. everything governor romney has said time and time again, he said he will have a revenue neutral reform. if you say he is proposing a $5 trillion tax cut, he is not saying that. if you think he cannot get to 28%, if you're going to every revenue neutral forum, they would have a different trained in rates. -- change in rates. he will try to do but of congress will not give what he gets to 20%, there is no one who believes he will increase taxes $2,000 on anyone. i can't believe the obama campaign would say that entity, as would be appear repeating be as stupid and inane talking points. it is wrong. >> governor romney says he will

cut income tax rates by 20% across the board. he said that as a lower priority promise. >> he always said is we need and $86 reform, revenue neutral, that broadens the base. >> the accusation is that all of them can't be true. >> the accusation is that he is promising to raise taxes. >> if the candidate says three things and it is not possible for all things to be true, then people are speculating as to which one he does not mean. you said the one he may not be able to keep as the one for lower income tax rates by 20%. >> i'm not saying he won't keep that promise but by were writing this study and i found that i cut the base more than in half,

cut that tax expenditures and you don't have enough revenue -- the nonpartisan center would say what kind of rape you? ? they would not say what is the tax increase? that's what they did. >> we are facing a huge deficit problem in this country and it is irresponsible for a candidate for president to propose a massive tax cut targeted at the rich and not name a single tax expenditure he will get rid of to pay for it. >> this comes from a guy who promise he would cut the top marginal rate in the last election. he had control of the house and he chose not to do it. he knew it would harm the economy and now he is trying to do it again.

why is that they are letting a guy run with no plan whatsoever. the only proposal is the proposal he had last on which he refused to do. is the economy's so good we can raise marginal rates? >> president obama as a $4 trillion deficit reduction plan that has been scored by the independent congressional budget office. it starts to bring down the debt to gdp ratio. it is a real budget completely itemized and in contrast to mitt romney will not tell us a single thing that will pay for his tax plan. >> you made the point that you would use 86 as an example and the governor proposes a revenue- neutral tax reform. in other words, the governor thinks he can reduce the deficit without raising taxes in the static cents.

simpson-bowles says no and other bipartisan plans say you cannot let the tax increases to the top 2%. that is what the president has proposed. how is that the governor romney thinks he can bring the deficit down and not raise taxes and still do spending cuts that are safe for the economy and politically acceptable? how can you limit the tax increases to the top 2%? >> everybody knows that the problem is spending. if you look up the board, medium and long-term forecasts, revenue under current law to gdp ends up higher than is typical. spending is really out of

control. if you want to get ahead of the curve, you have to go after spending. governor romney's proposal is to put forward what he would do to spending. matt jenson and i have a paper on fiscal consolidation that look to the countries around the world that tried to do this in the past and we found there are two types of countries that pursued fiscal consolidation. the successful countries that reduced the deficit tended to have fiscal consolidation that was 85% spending cuts and 15% tax increases on average. the unsuccessful ones were about 5050. president obama's approach, if you go through that fancy mechanics they go through to hide the fact that they have big tax increases is a plan. they believe we're starting from

a baseline of the top marginal rates. governor brown is put this plan down but have you had a plan like that, would you arm the economy? the way to think about is that there are two eat? -- what is the near-term potentially negative effects of lower coverage. the other is the sigh of relief that we go from a world where we have an imbalance that they cannot sustain to world were you consider what the rules of the game will be in the future. if you focus your reforms on long-term changes to entitlements, you create a sigh of relief effect. the $4 trillion number -- i want to " glenn kessle/.

he said no serious budget analyst would agree with this. >> this shows that if you want to do a serious deficit reduction plan and still be able to make important investments in education and infrastructure wrinkly energy that will build a strong economy and great strong middle-class jobs go to court, it has to be balanced approach. it would involve spending cuts and neutral revenue. the president has shown his budget top end come tax folks have to let their marginal rate go up to the sense that was during kim's own -- clinton. you can come up with enough revenue that goes along with the cuts that you can bring the deficit down and you don't have to wax the middle-class. over the last 15 years, middle- class has struggled even before

this a serious economic downturn. raising said is a middle-class is not the answer. >> if simpson-bowels were to come back to the president, if romney was elected president, what we each do with this? the president has already rate -- weighed in. >> i will not stay for the president but my guess is the president has put forth -- forth a budget that follows simpson- bowles. the president's plan customers -- domestic discretionary spending. it cuts of the domestic spending like health-care and agriculture spending.

the president did not raise taxes as simpson-bowels and he thought their retirement plan did not have enough new revenue. i think the president to get up there and say it is a good framework. there are negotiations with it. >> sinosib-bowles is already a model but against the simple reforms that have failed. tax hikes tend to depress economic growth but the tektites tend to give people shelter to avoid tough changes to entitlement. you need to have a sustainable fiscal consolidation. president obama, the thing we did not like about simpson-

bowels is it needs to have higher tax revenue and smaller spending goals. we are already starting from a bill that is designed to mimic plans in the past. the romney approach is more prudent. . >> the piece of simpson-bowles that addresses defense cuts, you feel he has gone too far. that raises a question about defense cut. how much concern is there on the part of the president that defense cuts, to what extent

does cutting defense cost jobs? >> is certainly a threat and i would not want to give anyone the impression that i understand exactly what the right percentage is spent on defense. marty feldstein wrote this interesting piece during the stimulus debate talking about how if you watch -- ready products, and never -- a normal way to stimulate the economy would be to turn the knob of but the assembly line president obama just rejected the stimulus

spending. this is not follow marty's advice. >> non-defense spending does? >> there is nobody, i fak c-span.org >> let's go back to econ 10. if government spending drops a lot next quarter and all else is equal, gdp will go down. that does not mean that we should go out and willy-nilly take money away from capital foundation i am not speaking for governor romney but he has been concerned about the nation's infrastructure. he felt like we needed to invest more but as an economist, i noticed that most accounts they

get weak -- that we need to get to job creation. we are in this cycle of dependency put on by president obama. when to get off and at the silicon -- six -- >> we have to prevent the sequester from happening. the way to do that is not to waicve it after the election. we should set our level of defense needs.

-- level of defense spending based on need. the reason to justify defense spending is not because it creates jobs. despite the large deficit we are facing, mitt romney has said we should tet -- said defense spending at 4% of gdp. he has not justified this with any specific military programs, he just says 4% is a good number. this is a very irresponsible policy. i thank as a big threat to our fiscal policy. there was a suggestion that we ramp up a defense production as part of the stimulus package. during this transition, we were reaching into economists from

the omb team and i talked to marty ne made a suggestion and i talked to my secretary secretary and they reached the to the defense department to see if we could do a policy of ramping up production in the short term. but went and investigated and talk to to the firm that was involved. we are fighting two wars right down operate all of our plants at full capacity. give us more money now to shift things forward, we cannot do that. we could build new factories in the year and a half but it might be over by then. we were told was not feasible. >> let me turn to medicare for a moment. we have a spending problem.

>> you are right, we cannot have health care spending continuing to grow at 2% faster than gdp otherwise it will eat the whole budget. in addition, when health-care

costs grow fast, it affects workers' wages and prevents them from getting the raises a want. to bring down health care spending, we need to change the way we pay for it. we have to move away from our fee-for-service system. we pay hospitals and doctors more for the quantity of health care they provide and instead we should pay them based on quality of care they provide. if you are a hospital today and you figure out that when you discharge the patient from a hospital that if you assign a nurse to the process to work for the patient to make sure they understand the discharge instructions and medicines they are on and you have that nurse follow up to make sure the patient is doing the right thing, it has very good of fax.

-- good effected. hospitals who of donnas have lost money because the nurse doing that is not paid for. hospitals are not reimbursed by medicare. our current payment system does not reward hospitals to do the right thing. the same thing happens in the doctor's office. we have to switch to a payment system that rewards the quality of care and rewards coordinating care and away from fee-for- service. the affordable care act moves us in that direction and lays the foundation for the kind of changes we have to make in pension reform to save money not by passing costs on to seniors and not by across-the-board cuts

but been a smart way and making people healthier and saving money. the congressional budget office says in the second decade, the affordable care act will said $1.60 trillion from the budget. >> that is an expanded entitlement that will cost the taxpayers a heck of a lot of money in the long run and everybody knows it. there are a million treks that made it look ok in the budget window. acupuncture is now an essential service and chiropractic is an essential service.

your money will now go to pay for acupuncture and chiropractic. the idea of the this new entitlement is going to save us money is false. governor romney as a proposal that could get ahead of the curve on this by creating competition between firms. that is really the only hope we have. how great symbol aired aside to pay somebody is left and not having people think that will impact healthcare is a pipe dream. >> the romney solution to health care is to give people a voucher and give insurance companies a bigger cut of the pie to bring down costs, there is no evidence of that.

if that was the solution, we would have the most efficient health-care system and the world. the romney plan, instead of having a guaranteed medicare benefit, we will give you a fixed cashman and you have to buy from an insurance company your insurance package and that fixed amount will not grow as fast as health care costs. over time, seniors will have increased costs coming out of their pocket and a recent study found that for someone 50 years old today is it would mean $120,000 in additional payments out of pocket over their lifetime. this cost shifting is not a solution. we have to make the tough choices about how to fix the payments system and make the system more efficient. >> do you have a rebuttal? >> that clarify exactly the

disagreement that if you think a government monopoly that dictates prices to producers cuts their reimbursement rates and a sense of what influence your standard of care, if you believe that is the path to go down, in 10 years, you'll be waiting in line. if we pursue a plan proposed by governor romney, you are deciding and a government monopoly is not the sighting. it is the history of economics that such a setting as one that maximize efficiency. >> picking up on the retirement age which is 65 now for medicare and is going up to 67 for social security. should it go up? what is the thinking? >> president obama has said he does not think the social

security retirement age should go up. there are lots of americans who have worked hard all their life and cannot do it anymore. if those americans want to access their health-care benefits at 62, they should be able to do that. and medicare tax on natural with the answer to that is. >> governor romney's plan has been called progress of indexing and that is a sound way to restore social security and the long run as an economist, as we look out 30, 40, 50 years and look at what happens to the entitlement programs, start to have the gains in longevity.

and when reforming social security will have to build in some kind of things that change as longevity does. if they want, they won't have a system that is sustainable. >> on social security, the fiscal hole is not as big as our other financial challenges. it is not as big as the short- term budget shortfall and not as big as the long-term medicare shortfall but we really need to get ahead on this. the way this country has always dealt with shortfalls in social security is with new revenue and some fall of benefits and the meat in the middle. mitt romney has proposed, this is the first time i've ever seen this, and on balance plan the says no new revenue for social security. we will close the imbalance completely on the benefits side. the implication of that is that there is a 30% in balance between social security revenue and benefits and cents he will

fall and the benefit side, he is proposing an average of 30% benefit cuts and the protect low income folks and the disabled, we're talking about someone making $60,000 per year will get a 40% benefit cut from social security. president obama thinks we should have a balanced approach and we should not do it all for benefit cuts. >> jeff is right the social security is the easiest of our problems. we are promising to pay future rich americans the large benefit. we don't need to pay really rich social security benefits to warren buffet or bankrupting ourselves to do that. there is so much leverage to be had with that observation that

we don't have to have a tax hike. president obama seems to be looking for every excuse to have a tax hike. >> 40% is not a simple solution. >> i believe that governor romney says he would raise the medicare age to 67. i believe president obama offer that in the john boehner talks but it is not in his campaign proposals. i want to ask a question not involving the u.s. i'm not sure of the difference between the two candidates on china. both sides seem to have been doing some saber-rattling. can you speak to what the policy of your can they would be toward china as an economic competitor for? ?

most >> of the discussion in the campaign has been about unfair trade practices and the chinese currency manipulation. the president has worked hard and has said strongly in public and private that china needs to appreciate its currency and it removed its peg to the dollar a few years ago but that is not enough. on trade practices, back in 2009, the chinese started flooding our market with tires and threatening the u.s. tire industry and president obama put tariffs on the tire industry to protect our industry. the wto said those were.

terrace and the chinese screamed loudly about this. mitt romney took the chinese side in that debate and said we should not put on those tariffs. but that where up to six or seven different trade cases before the wto when china has tried to dump products on the u.s. in other industries that would take over the market. obama has brought these cases that twice the rate that the previous president did. until about six months ago, mr. romney was criticizing the president on this policy and has now changed his view. >> it is clear the governor rahman believes that president obama is wrong in every way about trade. the biggest thing is wrong about is the notion that we don't need

to pursue new trade agreements with other partners. free trade is one of those things that every congressman agrees that makes americans better off. president obama seems to disagree i think the governor romney of view in terms of the bilateral a ship with china is that currency manipulation and dumping and cheating is rampant and no president before has been aggressive enough towards china. i'm not a trade economist so going into details is beyond my purview. >> the president being against treat -- free trade is not the case. he signed free-trade agreements with south korea and panama and colombia but did not sign until they had appropriate protections for american workers.

it is important for the political economy of free trade that we have appropriate protections for workers. if you believe in free trade but you don't take care of the workers who get hurt, then the policy becomes impossible. i think the president has to move aggressively to increase u.s. exports and set a target for ee experts by the end of his term and exports are way up. >> that's why the congress is being flooded with these new trade agreements the president has made -- their agenda is full. >> that is a good note to turn to all of you where it is your turn to ask your questions. you can stand or maybe there is a microphone. don't be bashful. step up and ask your questions. i have one noted that i may have

to sneak away earlier than the end of the program. in order to anchor the news program but my cable cyclical takeover. you are first, sir. >> i would like to ask a question -- how is it possible that we have a president who has not had a single budget proposal approved during his entire presidency and he is allowed to spend $1 trillion per year and nobody says anything about it? >> that's not accurate. the president's budget was passed in 2009. in subsequent years, congress has operated under continuous resolutions. they are setting precise budget targets and agencies have to live under those targets.

i agree that the appropriations process has been a mess the last few years because of partisan disagreement but there is not any out of control spending going on. if you look at the preparations over the last four years, the budget authority in the u.s. has grown at 0.3 annual rate. under president bush, it grew at 9%. the idea that spending is out of control is simply false. what is happening right now is the baby boomers are retiring. we have known since they were born we would have to be spending more on our retirement programs. in fact, the retirement of the baby boom is raising government spending in this decade by 3% of gdp. it is true that spending is

going up but not because of out of control appropriations or decisions being made by the president. >> washington is a crazy place. presidents have had to work with congress as of all sorts of stripes. sometimes you show up at the game and you have the nfl refs and sometimes the replacement refs. presidents of both parties have been able to lead by negotiating reasonable proposals with the other side and let just letting them. this is a president with control of the senate which has the reconciliation process so it should be easy to pass the budget and has been unable to get there because he is so ideologically different from

moderates and republicans that he is not willing to sit down and negotiate something that he can send to capitol hill -- no cherry picking -- remember that? we have not heard that once. he is not saying that because he is outside the process. >> short rebuttal? >> soon after the president took office, he started working with republicans over the recovery act and climate change. the senate majority leader, mitch mcconnell said my top priority is not to get anything done, it is the stop the president from passing things so he does not get reelected. the republicans decided to filibuster just about every bill and there were only four months during the last four years where the democrats had a majority.

when the president makes a completely common-sense proposal like tax cuts for small business and putting construction workers back to work and preventing layoffs of teachers and firefighters, supporting the bipartisan way, the republicans are saying no. a routine debt limit extension, the republicans tried to create a financial crisis out of it. >> a question on health care -- that want to change the way providers should be paid. how you measure the quality of how they should be paid? >> that is a great question. some of them that are built into the affordable care act are re- admission rates and if you charge people to come back into

the hospital for the same thing, that as a sign they are not doing a good job. another thing as a metric is infection rates. if you are a hospital and you are making your patience sector -- sicker because there kedging infections among possible, that is a metric. -- they are catching in factions and that is a metric. you can develop these matters but it is not easy and it is an ongoing scientific effort to come up with the right kind of metrics. >> i have a challenge for each of you. i would like to hear each of you tell me about three policies or suggestions the other candidate

has that you agree with [laughter] let's do one so we can get to more questions. >> can i do two? it is nice because we get heated some time. i have known jeff for a long time and i don't mean to get angry but president obama helped lead on unemployed insurance reform. kack reid of rhode island wrote the bill. it was something that i'm on the record as saying it is a good idea. there was a proposal i while ago to think about the base broadening in terms of capping the benefits of deductions. i forget the form in which the proposal came but that the death

benefit would be capped a 28%. that was a clever idea. if i had to pick two things, those would be the ones. >> you referred earlier to read -- the replacement referees. it occurred to me that we have hall of fame moderator's from getting out of control today. >> and we are lucky the crowd did not start shouting >> in terms of good ideas from governor romney, i think he is absolutely right that we should be cutting corporate rates and doing it in a revenue-neutral way. my reading of the evidence as you can cut into 28% and pay for it and you can go all the way to 25%. it is not the kind of thing you can work out later.

governor romney was visionary when he created the health insurance framework which became the affordable care act. recently, governor romney had been saying that a wide to get rid of the affordable care act but he said want to keep the good parts but he did not say what those were but i hope it is 98%. . . .

>> the thing that makes looking back at history not the answer to the question of what we should do going forward is the baby boomers are now retiring. we have got to come up with more revenue or have to come up with other spending and we have retirement-related spending. the commission set targets for revenue, i think, a 22% of gdp

the commission set targets for revenue, i think, a 22% of gdp and -- sorry, 21% of gdp in spending of 21% of gdp. the president is a little lower than that on revenue but above the long-term average because we have to pay for the -- >> this is the challenge of fiscal consolidation. as we start to align the numbers and think about the tax cut, understand that in a lot of baselines, there is revenue coming. if we made no changes. -- changes, everybody is in the top bracket. governor romney is shooting to have our route 20% of gdp. there is ample room to achieve

objectives like that. a historical level of revenue would not be sufficient to balance the budget, but sufficient to stabilize. >> my understanding is that each presidential candidate needs huge amounts of money to run the campaign. the donors financed the campaigns with different interests. it seems like is inevitable that there will be positives. the financial crisis was caused by a weird fiscal situation, a weird regulatory situation. you would think that both parties were involved with different presidents and different congresses. given in light of this debate

and the debate among the candidates, there is a divergence of views of what the facts are, what the analysis is, what the solutions are. my question is, what do you think is possible about why we should believe if there is a chance for rational decisions on fiscal policy and regulatory policy, without an increase for the national investments, there is an increase in economic growth. >> your very gracious. -- you are very gracious. talked about campaign donors and i can assure you that we are not getting paid. there are marginal products, that is right.

the thing that gives me hope, it is not even about this election. people have the say, the thing that gives me hope is that i have worked with the american enterprise institute, and a look at who is coming through, telling us how to use the fiscal policy. we had the swedish finance minister, man and talk about the changes that we should make. he was right about the current democratic party. i thought they talked about lots of lessons from canada that cut the corporate rate 15%, and i think what gives me hope, it's that the rest of the

world has learned that approaches like governor romney's are ones you should pursue. the only holdouts are the democrats in d.c. >> it is amazing that the idea of going back to the failed policies of the last decade were the solution to all problems was cut taxes on the rich and let wall street right its own rules, he wants to double down on them. he doesn't want to extend the bush tax cuts, he wants to give millionaire's an extra tax cut. he doesn't want to preserve the loopholes that allow people to operate corporations and the cayman islands, he was to eliminate taxation of a u.s. firm. the idea that obama -- one

second. you took a shot, let me answer the real question. it is not that big. if we do a balanced approach, like the president does in his budget, we can solve these problems. i think that the congressmen and the president are not going to have a choice. they will get together and solve these problems. it is too significant. if you look back at how we got out of the problem in the 1990's, we have major deficit-reducing legislation in

1997, 1983, it took several pieces of legislation to get the job done. i think that the experience shows that the political process doesn't have to be perfect. you can yell and scream for two years in the third year, make a bit of progress. you can that 333 and hit a single. you can get things to be fixed. it will be much better after the election, we deal with it. if the congress and the president can start down this path, it will do a lot to make our economy stronger than what is right now. >> it highlights the challenge

as well. the u.s. is the only country on earth that doesn't have a territorial tax system. and the notion that the obama campaign would be attacking a similar treatment as some kind of radical giveaway to business is strange to me. we have to get past this in our history. >> i will speak away. it has been great. [applause] >> for economics, you advocated and for less government spending and higher private-sector competition. i was wondering how that position can be justified for the united states compared to

those less advanced with a better outcomes. >> thank you for your question. what one has asked, what explains the extraordinary growth. i think he has a piece on this that i would confine -- find pretty convincing. the outlook for long-term growth is worse. in the near-term effect, it is bad for growth.

why that result is true, what economists calle da solo is t -- called a solo is the huge iphone 5 things. the second thing is that if you want to have higher consumption in the future, you have to save today. three years from now, you have money in the bank and you can increase consumption in the future. if you have a government that is running massive deficits, when we try to save so we can have a better future, the government is borrowing that money. that means that we won't have the resources in the future to support consumption. the view that government

spending for gdp would be a prudent policy, that is not something that is supportable. >> under the budget deal that the president worked out, we will take discretionary spending down to the lowest level of gdp since the eisenhower administration. we absolutely need a balanced approach to reduce the deficit so we can continue to make the investments of middle-class families. manufacturing, they create the good jobs going forward. when you look at a budget plan like governor romney, going towards the rich, it has to flash -- slash special neri spending beyond this baseline, and they don't specify how they

will cut the spending. that really threatens the kind of middle-class investments that are important to economic growth. >> was at healthcare specific? we can spend less and have better outcomes. what makes you think that we can go the other direction? >> there is an outcome observation that has a lot of debates. the fact is, if your choice is to adopt a system of government provision, single-payer, you can expect long lines and reduce the quality of care. the u.s. has been a place where most of the innovation in the world happens in the health care space.

most of the cool new drugs have come from the u.s. market because we haven't had the government go in and cut the heck out of cost and dictate to people what they should do or what they can't do. and i think that if you want to continue to have innovation, if you want to don't strive towards curious, then you need to have a free market approach to healthcare. basically my view is i think that to a large extent the rest of the world has been free riding on america on our invasion which and if you take that away and think we're going to be better off 30 or 40 years from now, i think that's a pipe dream. >> i think led by the u.s. has been a period where we had a strong traditional medicare

prasm. so i think we need to strength than program and work on the incentives in medicare but not to go to a radical

healthcare. and so i absolutely think that going forward that if we socialize medicine that it's going to make us worse off and that it's going to cost a lot of money. and i think that the notion we're going to get cost savings out of constraining people's access to doctors while we expand the coverage of things is something i wouldn't support. >> this discussion we were talking about socialized medicine t. affordable care act takes governor romney's pran and builds insurance companies and insurance companies can't deprive people of care for preexisting conditions but it's a market base add proach so i don't know what kevin means when he's talking about

socialized medicine. >> i just wanted to provide a bookend to this debate because at the beginning both the moderate tors asked you specifically about what each campaign would do to spur job growth hiring through hiring more people investment. i know you both are economist and i wonder if you can play small business person or owner and if you can walk through what are the biggest considerations that you think a small business person thinks before they make an investment decision or a hiring decision, are they considering whether the federal budget would be balanced thrkssy of relief effect, do they consider what their tax rate is going to be or do they simply want to know

will there be enough demand or service for this person before i hire this person or make this investment decision? could you rank those three or include other considerations? >> luckily for me because i'm not the best actor, the national federation of independent businesses surveys small businesses and asks them what their biggest concern is and what you see as the economic crisis unfold and as we've gone forward is that the percentage of small business people who said that worrying about w

proposals because they're going to do budget cutting and cost us a million jobs. so i think there is a contrast between the two candidates. and there is a job advantage on the president's side. >> since i guess this is the last question too i'd like to pause and thank you both. it's been a stimulating debate.

i think that once again, the stakes are clear that if you think that raising taxes on small businesses, a huge fraction of small business income is until the marginal rate. it's going to create jobs, then you should definitely vote for president obama. if you think that having a fiscal consolidation and 1986 style tax reform, you think those things will create jobs then you should vote for governor romney. we've laid out our differences. but in the end that's the bottom line. president obama doesn't have a plan, he's got a budget that didn't get any votes from the democrats and he's got a top marginal tax rate he refused to increase. and no story for why heel do it now and he didn't do it then.

governor romney has a tax plan that's supported by a vast amount of literature that says it will turn the country around and i think that will turn the country around. >> in the hierarchy of small business things which matters more the presence of demand or -- >> he said demand. >> it goes back to something i said that the president said -- i think the president's view is it's demand all the way through. and i think it's supply and demand. so we have to create an environment where businesses are willing to hire again. and so you can't just say well it's all one curve or the other, it's both. so we need to have a prudent plan that stimlates demand and does so with transparency and

fiscal sanity in a way that creates conditions for supply going forward. >> there are a lot of draw backs of these very extended presidential cam painls. but there's one advantage because you get to see what decisions make or would make and form judgments about how they would act if they were president. and what we've seen over the last four years is that president obama has kstly made the right decisions for american workers and for american families. he made the tough decision to rescue the auto industry when others didn't think that was a good idea. he stood up to unfair trade practices 23r china and aggressively stepped in when the housing market turned down to make it possible for home

owners to refinances to prevent mortgage foreclose yures. and what we've seen kstly from governor romney is making the wrong calls on these issues. he said we should let detroit go bankrupt and let the housing market go bottom and took the chinese side on the tire debafmente as we go forward and americans think about the choice that's before them, if they want to choose a president who is going to make right decisions for middle class families and workers and not take us back to a policy environment that's based on special rules for corporations and high income people and deregulation of wall street then the choice is clear, president obama is your candidate if you care about a strong economy for the middle class.

>> well, i would say i have the easy job today and that is to say thank you to our moderate tors and our discussion. good economic policy making is about setting priority tiss, recognizing resources and making choices and perhaps most of all it's about leadership economic and political. the subtext of this debate today is that we and the next administration whoever it may be face huge challenges. historically the united states has found through democratic process and enlightened reflection the ability to unbalance, make the best decision and take the right path however tough it is. none of the paths that we've contemplated here today are easy. we know that. but we really appreciate your willingness to talk about it. we are very committed to

response supporting debates like this one. we are very interested in sponsoring this debate. we know that sound policy with respect to fiscal policy is a key greed yent for healthy markets. regardless of the upcoming election cycle we are going to continue to host these type of discussions most directly in march we're going to have our policy meeting which is march 3 to 5 right here in d.c. so we're going to get a great opportunity to talk about all of these issues in march and again thank you for joining us and asking all these great questions. thank you.

>> will the same path we're on means $20 trillion in debt at the end of a second term he won't v. it means stagnant take home pay, a devastated military and unless we change course we may be looking at another recession. so the question of this election comes down to this, do you want more of the same or do you want real change? >> we know what change looks like and what gorment is selling ain't it. given more power to the biggest isn't change. another $5 trillion for the wealthy, that's not change. refusing to answer questions about the details of your policies until after the election, that's definitely not change. we're ruling out compromise by

pledging the rubber stamp to tea party folks in congress, that's not change. changing the facts when their inquonet to your m campaign, not change. >> watch live coverage tuesday night on c-span plus key house and senate races aoh cross the country. and throughout the night your reaction. live coverage starts at 8:00 eastern on c-span, c-span radio and cspan.org. >> much of this comes down to two pockets of the state, clark county which is the biggest population center and has 70% of the population. and in the northern part of the state another 20% of the pop ration around reen know and carson city. the republicans are going to make a huge pitch to turn people out in the rural counties because if they can

have the highest participation there, those are counties that count and will matter for the congressional district for race which is the new district. i will be looking at different sorts of groups. this has been an election where people have been talking to blocks of voters whether it's women or veterans. i'm going to be looking to see from the exit poll and from the conversations leading into it how is this message affecting people to go to the polls perhaps instead of just how they vote. how is the medicare conversation that is just everywhere affecting seniors. because seniors are another block that didn't go for obama in 2008. and it's been the democrats biggest message across the country if you vote in republicans good buy to your

medicare as you know it. so i'm going to try to see how and whom these talking points, these campaigning points are settling at home with. >> this is the last day of campaigning before the election tomorrow. republican vice presidential candidate paul ryan will be in colorado this afternoon. we have live coverage at 3:30 eastern on spon followed by your reaction. president obama and mitt romney in ohio today. they'll be in columbus today at different times. mitt romney has made campaign stops in florida and virginia before heading off to ohio and then new hampshire. both candidates hold their final rallies tonight at the same time.

president obama in des moines iowa. bruce string teen will be with the president. mr. romney will be in new hampshire tonight with singer kid rock. our final coverage starts at 8:00 eastern. >> we're going to be watching the counties around denver. you'll hear a lot of talk about jefferson county whichever candidate in the presidential race wins those counties, they have a much easier path to winning the state of colorado. i'll be looking closely at the number of republican votes coming out of douglas county on the western slope. another swing county we pay attention to is northern colorado, it's fort collins is there, home to colorado state university. then we'll be looking at as far as democrats boulder and denver and seeing if they're getting

their numbers the way they want to. and the democrats have paid considerable attention to the southwest corner of the state. so we'll be looking there to see if they're banking lots of coats in the southwest corner of the state as well. >> we've got a couple of swing counties as every state has. the nice part is one of these bell wethers is just east of the lake. they usually turn the results in first and they're pretty close. they've often predicted the president fment i'm going to look there and in central ohio. obviously we're going to see totals across the state immediately with the early voting totals, the absentee ballots because those remember

are sent in. they're processed and recorded, they're just notal lid. it's a push of the button and at 7: 31 we're going to get a sense of where things are. wherever that is leaning will hold as an indicator. i think the race will come down to less than two percentage points in ohio. >> the national presidential race is why people are looking at north carolina. but in the state we have it's been a battleground. we have several battlegrounds going on. we have the governor race going on. north carolina has had 20 straight years of democratic governors. it's the longest run of democratic governors east of the mississippi river. that could come to an end. the current incumbent governor who is the state's first woman

governor decided not to seek reelection and the democratic nominee is in the polls suggest is in deep trouble and looks like that former charlotte mayor who lost in 2008 is in double digit has maintained a lead the entire year and looks to be in very good shape to be the first republican governor since jim martin was elected in 1980. so it's shaping up as a very good republican year in the state. >> i'm going to be looking at the cities of areas along the border of massachusetts but i'm also going to look at rotchester as i mentioned. one thing is governor romney announced he will be here the day before the election.

historically another president did that as well -- another candidate for president did and that was john f. kennedy. he came to new hampshire before coming down to cape cod to wait for returns which we know did not come through that very evening in 1960. >> how is governor romney dealing with the good economy in new hampshire, 5.7% unemployment rate? >> well it is a little bit tricky if your main message is economy and new hampshire's economy is and their unemployment rate is so low. it is slightly tricky. one issue that the democrats have been using -- >> you can see the rest of these remarks online at cspan.org. >> we're going to >> in response to hurricane

sandy you will hear from fema administrator and we are joined by h.u.d, secretary and red cross senior v.p. for disaster services. following remarks we will be taking questions from reporters. we will take one question per person and with that i turn it over to the administrator. >> good afternoon. the response is i think if you get in some of the areas where storm surge was people had significant flood damage in their homes and the impact is reflected in our current registrations for assistance over 217,000 have registered and over right now we're at about $199 million in

assistance has already been provided t. bulk of that $1993 million in housing and $6 million for eligible cost. and the numbers we expect to don't go up as people are able to get registered and get the assistance. but this also shows why it's going to take a strong federal partnership and state local government to address the homes damaged. as power comes on it's becoming clear for many people the longer term issues will be rebuilding and repairing their homes. our programs provide some initial assistance but our partnership with our federal family is the advantage we have in solving these problems. and i'd like to introduce the secretary of h.u.d, who has many programs immediate and

longer term we work in partnership with. so mr. secretary. >> thank you. i appreciate all the remarkable work that you're doing which and i just returned from two days in new york city myself over the weekend. and i will say what i saw was sobering. i visited families and communityties that had been devastated and i will say quite personally as a native new yorker and housing commissioner in new york city, visiting family, i attended a funeral yesterday for the daughter of a friend who was killed in the storm as well as seeing a very very large scale development that i remember the planning of, i remember cutting the ribbon with mayor broomberg and

to now see that entire development flooded, it was particularly moving to me. all of those experiences. but i also saw remarkable courage and strength that i know is a hall mark of new yorkers and of those residents of the entire riegenn recovering. i met one woman whose home had burned to the ground. she had lost a relative in 9/11. and not long before that i had watched flight 586 crash just a few blocks fwr her home. and she was taking strength and preparing to rebuild once again. so remarkable efforts. and also i visited one of the disaster recovery centers that

fema had set up, met families that were registering there, shook the hands and thanked national guard members and a whole range of others that are working to support shelters and hospitals to get power and heat back up. and feeding and even clothing in some cases families who have lost everything. we are very focused both on the short term needs. we've been working very closely with craig, housing authorities and other providers across the region to get power and heat and food and water into buildings. but we are also, as craig said, very focused on the need for medium term and long-term solutions for housing for families in the region. we have already done a full

survey of our portfolios of housing that we have at h.u.d,, both market rate and affordable and have begun bosting that information on the portal, the fema housing portal that we developed in partnership with fema after katrina. we knew it would be important in large scale disasters. and we already have nearly a thousand homes for rent. click an the fema housing portal from our website and you can get access to that. we've also been working on identifying particular units available to seniors or other who may have medical service needs as well and those will be absolutely critical resources going forward. we are also beginning to focus on the longer term process of

rebuilding. i spoke to some families that were already asking what resources are there to rebuild. obviously craig has talked about the importance of registering with fema. we've already seen over 160,000 families register. that's critical. we also want to make sure families know first of all they'll be safe while they think about their rebuilding. i've directed all f.h.a. lenders to impose a more torme on foreclosers in disaster areas. we don't want families to be victimized twice once by the storm and twice by the foreclosure. we want to make sure as they work with insurance companies they're not taken advantage of. we saw families took their fema dollars and used them to pay

down mortgages instead of using them to rebuild their homes and in that way lost their opportunity to rebuild. so we want to make sure that we are sending a clear message to insurance companies to work with home owners to rebuild, not to take those proceeds and use them for their own advantages as lenders to pay down those mortgages. we also want to make sure that the assist thans we can provide gets out to families. we do have insurance programs at f.h.a. that can help families either renovate or fully rebuild their homes. we have special programs with better terms for those who are rebuilding after a disaster. and so those are programs that we are getting the word out to families about as well.

finally, i also think it's critical that families know that there are resources to help guide them through this process. too often we've seen families taken advantage of by scam artist action, whether contractors or others posing as someone who would help them to rebuild. the vast majority of businesses are legitimate and want to do the right thing, but unfortunately there are those who would play on those who have been victimized by these storms. so i want anyone to know renters as well that they can reach out to a h.u.d, approved housing counselor. go to our website and we have counselors free of charge available in communities all across the region that have been hit by this storm. beyond the immediate issue of housing, our block funds have

been along with direct fema assistance have been one of the most important tools that communities use to rebuild not just housing but infrastructure in entire communities. we are working with all the affected areas to provide immediate flexibility on how they use their grants to move them to places where they need to begin rebuilding their houses, streets, bridges, all of the infrastructure that's been damaged by this terrible storm. with that let me stop and turn it back over to craig. >> i'm going to turn it th over to the red cross. >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. great to be here. we appreciate the updates on the status and hats off to the

great work of fema as well. i want to remind folks the response is not yet over. we're still in the sprint of response quite a bit as the marathon continues in the recovery work. american red cross the two priorities are to feed and shelter those in the impacted areas. the mass tive response grows by day for us. those without power who have been hit by wind and rain should expect wind, rain and cold and we're sending 80,000 blank etc. into the area ready to assist in warming shelters, they'll be open throughout the impacted area so people can escape the cold. in terms of feeding, our response from a feeding perspective is massive as we continue to prepare food,

shelter and relief supplies. our entire national fleet of emergency response vehicles more than 320 in total has been activated to distribute meals. more than 53 workers are on scene in new jersey and new york and west virginia supporting shelters, providing food and water and driving through neighbors. last night more than 9,000 people affected by sandy were staying in 113 shelters. we have 60 trailers of supplies t things people will need to snart their recovery. we are getting out meals to those impacted in new jersey and new york. as we learn about specific neighbors in need, we're of course immediately mobile liesing resources. i mentioned we've got our

entire fleet moving. we also have rental cars and trucks and any vehicle we can find. we've deployed our blood resources units vehicles to assist in food delivery. so you may see traditional buy med red cross vehicles distributing food. our partners at southern baptist convention have eight kitchens across knowledge knowledge. we're working here at our disaster operations center with meals on wheels association of america and feeding america. they are assisting here with making sure that their mobile feeding for the homebound, home delivery feeding is where it needs to be and that the local food banks can distribute food to those that may be homebound whether they can't get out of their home for one reason or another.

and we're working with them and using our dedge cal operation center which is our social media command center as we see tweets and facebook postings. people are expressing needs and we're turning that into response. that response will continue for many many days if not weeks as we all move into recovery and red cross is ready to assist in recovery. i'll turn it back over to you. >> i think we are ready for our first question operator. >> to ask a question press star 1 and record your name when prompted. >> i saw in one congressional advisory that just 400 people were eligible for the transitional sheltering

assistance that is the hotel and motel stays in new york. i wondered if that was a typo because it sounds low. how many people are in these ho tells already and how many are eligible for that assistance and lastly how much are you willing to pay for the rooms? because i know that the g.s.a. rate for manhattan is high like $195 a night in december. so any way -- >> the first question is numbers are -- who is eligible is based upon the criteria that the state it was limited to people that were actually in their shelters so that process is under going with the looking at who twoonts go where and what's available. i have to get the numbers of what the amount we're eligible to pay for. i don't have that in front of

me but we'll get that for you. but the eligibility was based on in new york who was still in shelters and were looking for a ho hotel or motel for a couple of weeks orless. >> next question please. >> how many h.u.d, units need to be rebuilt or how many people are out of homes in the metropolitan area? >> we have completed about 90% of our assessments of those units. we have still ongoing those assessments and let me just give you an example.

i visited the ham mel houses on saturday. families were without power there but had not evacuated. and one of the priorityties that i spent right through late last night and that morning was trying to make sure that we were getting both connections with lipa to provide power there as well as generators on site and mobile boilers that can heat those. as of yesterday morning those buildings started to come back online with generators. so the fundamental point here is while we're still assessing, dewatering, we don't know for sure how many units will need to be evacuated. and our hope is to make progress and partner with fema that we can get power up in

these buildings and heat up and be able to make sure we minimize the number of families that need to be moved. at this point, the total number -- and we can follow up with you with more detail, is relatively small in terms of those that have had to be relocated already. we primarily -- that's in the thousands. we've focus ond seniors and people with disabilities. and where there is an immediate environmental has saturday. but we will not know those numbers until we complete assessment and they are dewatered and once we've exhausted our efforts to get those up and running with again rate tors and temporary boilers.

we don't have a final total on that yet. >> i've been talking with some people who have already been told they don't qualify for rebuilding assistance with no explanation as to why that is so i'm wondering if you can give us a little bit of the cite i can't for the aid and what the threshhold for the income light b might be. >> it's works on a hierarchy of need. if you have insurance and the insurance has covered your losses. we'll ask you to file your claims and determine if there is any uncovered losses. so if you have insurance heats the first stop. if you continue have insurance or you have uninsured losses t next step would be a s.b.a. disaster loan depending on your

income and ability to repay. and the third level bowled if through that process you could not qualify for that and we can do that in the intake process due to other factors we can document we will provide grants t. primary focus of the grants is on housing. so we're more focused on getting people housing assistance not yet quite getting to all of the other things that are eligible through the grant program. so when people are told that, what that means is based upon the information they get, if they have insurance and that process is under going, it's based upon a high arki of need, not necessarily if you had damages. this is why people get different answers and different levels of assistance based upon did you have insurance and your income are you able to afford a

loan. and the loans are better than grabts. fema grants for the individual assistance are capped at $30,000 for the impacts. housing assistance isn't capped at that but it's also based upon the needs of people for housing assistance, not just losses. hopefully that helps a little bit. but we also have more information about that program. but again, it's based upon the hierarchy of needs, not that you have damaged but what are your losses and your ability to pay a small disaster loan. >> the only thing i would add to that is typically in major disasters, we have seen congress act to appropriate additional dollars beyond what is immediately available through fema. that is obviously something that will be up to congress to

determine, and something that i'm sure will be discussed going forward. but that would be additional aid that would be available above and beyond what might be immediately available under fema's current authorities. >> looks like we have time for two more questions. >> administrator, as you know along the jersey coast many of the storm victims were owners oaf second homes. what if any federal assistance is available to them? >> our individual assistance is designed for primary home owners or primary residents, so it would be based on if they have flood insurance and coverage. but it is based upon your

primary ress -- residence. so vacation homes would not qualify for the fema grant however small business disaster loans would be available and if they have flood insurance coverage then the coverage in effect at the time of the disaster. >> and our last question -- >> there was an earlier question about rental assistance and also the use of ho tells and month tells and there was a question about numbers. i have here the latest from my team on the status of that rental assistance and the individual payments. you mentioned that the number of registrations that had occurred already. we do have over 32,000

applicants that have been approved for exme dated rental assistance program for a total of over $95 million. and on transitional assistance the short-term lodging that can be used in participating hoe tells in new york and new jersey we have 34,000 applicants determined eligible already. so that clearly does not match one what was in the press release that was asked about, i think it was 400 was the number i remember. >> thank you. last question please. >> our final question is i visited some people along the coast who rented homes and had to be evacuated because their homes are uninhabitable. they also lost a lot of personal belongings.

they told me they don't have -- their insurance renters insurance doesn't cover these types of losses. as i understand it, they're not covered also under the owners flood insurance policy. so i ask about that and i also want to ask about how many do have you any idea of how many uninsurance got flood damage? i think the first one and second question at the same time i think renters are eligible for fema assistance and renters are not required to have flood insurance. the flood insurance requirement is for the structure and contents as a mortgage holder or in a case of somebody who is protecting the investment in the structure. so renters are not trired have flood insurance and often times

renters assistance if they have it will cover these losses. here is the key things uninsured losses, they may be eligible for fema assistance. the second part of the question is we will get a better idea of the number of uninsured. we are currently working on how many insured properties have been impacted as people have filed their claims and we have to do our due diligence to make sure people who have flood insurance are addressed to the flood insurance program and clear of the other programs. so we'll seeing those who had flood damage, essentially their damage is based upon the predicate. in the older houses people have lived there for a while you may not have a high percentage of flood insurance. we see that where people have

mortgages where they require mandatory purchase. we'll provide those in fact sheets. thank you. that concludes our call today. if you have any additional questions. please contact our press offices. for more information on people marks visit fema.gov. thank you. .

turnout. i think it will be sky high. whether we get split up comes in

the races. and whether we get an election that is much more like the 2000- 2004 of the top of the ticket, which was decided by less than half a percentage point in both cases or whether wisconsin and the preforming a little bit better for democrats than the national numbers, which has also happened on occasion. wisconsin switch back and forth between those patterns. i will be watching from washington on election night. >> i look for turnout in philadelphia. i look for the vote totals in lehigh in northampton. there the county's we look for that give us a sense for how the state might go. then you want to note tenor -- turnout differentials by county to see if there is something markedly different. turnout mirrors

the turnout nationally. i would not expect the turnout to be more than two percentage points off of what the national turnout was slightly above 60 percent of eligible voters nationwide. pennsylvania will be in the same range. in a close race, then you have to go out into the southwestern part of the state into those counties that i have talked about, the blue-collar working class counties. typically reporting comes earlier. at times when elections are close, we are actually waiting for the votes out west to come in that can often make a difference as to which canada wins or loses. wins or loses.e

paul ryan will be in johnstown, colorado this evening. while we wait for him, a look at president obama's chances tomorrow with a look at this morning's "washington journal." host: think you for coming in this morning. recent cover story, the starkest choice in decades, or is it? you in one of your colleagues look at what is at stake during the election. and you look at president obama and mitt romney. as he dug into president obama's time in office, what were some of the hallmarks of his governing style? >> he came into office with no executive experience at all. he also came in with enormous democratic majorities, which gave him a soft landing. he did not have to get into a lot of the huge back and forth,

tough legislating he faces now with divided government. he was able to get the stimulus through quickly. he is a number of accomplishment in his first two years. most prominently, health care reform, which he achieved with the large democratic majorities, and by -- about a record to say. the second two years he did not have majorities. therefore, he really had to change his style. he ran into a lot of problems in dealing with the republicans, although he is not as hard mind as the right says he is. he is willing to work across the aisle, as we saw in the summer of 2011 when we got to the whole office call -- cliff, but the debt ceiling.

he got close on some kind of a grand bargain with john boehner, but that showed they were willing to work together. >> what are some of the critiques that people do of the president as they look at what he has learned over the past three years and what they think he could have done better? >> one thing is he is probably given too much leeway to congress. he over learned lessons of the clinton years, and when clinton was trying to do health care reform, he delegated that to his wife. then they came up with the big plan that went nowhere because there was not much room for congress to act. with obama he give a lot of leeway, and basically ended up -- he got a lot of what he wanted, but did not get everything. that was not what he wanted.

he got health care reform. to go the choice and profile, president obama and former gov. mitt romney looking at what leadership would be like in the next four years. with four more years of obama change the washington dynamics? what did you find out? pico and started out by making the assumption if president obama wins reelection, then i think the democrats will remain control of the senate. basically what we would have is what we have now come a democratic white house, senate, republican house. so it will be in some ways a continuation of where we've already been, but a second term. president obama will not have to please his face as much to keep

them happy for reelection. for republicans, this is a great source of concern, because the fear is the left side of him will come out and become a full- blown socialist. the democrats will not get close to 60 seats. it will be kind of the same, but kind of different. host: looked at the governing style of mitt romney. we will play an excerpt and look at an advertisement that challenges him from the mayor run the campaign on leadership. taking a look at president obama in hollywood, florida yesterday speaking of

.ipartisanship here yet to g >> i want all parties to work together. whenever the of the party has been willing to work with me to help middle-class families and build sturdy ladders into the middle class, i of work with them. some courageous republican senators work with me to repeal the us, don't tell. as long as i am president, i will work with anybody of any party to move this country forward. if you want to break the gridlock in congress, you will vote for leaders who feel the same way. who put you first instead of politics first. but sometimes you have to fight for principle. sometimes you have to fight for what is right. if the price of peace in

washington is cutting deals, then we will kick students off financial aid or get rid of funding for planned parenthood or let insurance companies discriminate with people pre- existing conditions or a limited health care for millions on medicaid, i am not willing to pay that price. that is not bipartisanship. that's not change. that is surrender to the same status quo that has hurt the middle class and cost us jobs. i do not know about you, but i am not ready to give up on that fight. host: president obama on the campaign trail this weekend. how successful has the president did when it comes to bipartisanship? guest: he has had some successes, but certainly there has been a lot of internal turmoil on the republican side of the rise of the tea party.

john boehner who does not completely controlled his caucus. that creates another interesting dynamic, even if president obama is willing to deal in play, it is not clear where the republicans will be. ey loses, you can expect a certain firing squad. there will be a lot of blame. and as one of the people i spoke to from my story is that if anyone thinks a second story -- second term will be to my god, that is not happening. host: thomas a republican from florida. caller: a registered republican. i registered to support ron paul. i became a libertarian where i have interviewed more third- party candidates than anywhere

in 2012. obama had a full house and senate, just like bush did their first two years, immediately the american people rejected that. there is a 10 percent approval ratings in gallup polls. there's not a better time to have a political revolution. that means electing anyone except for an aggressive again. also, i did have a question, is brian the lamp still hosting? i do not see the difference between tehe two. jerry brown is still the governor. i will be looking forward to those debates later today with him in jill's fine. thank you very much. host: brian lamb is still

hosting q&a. talk more about whether or not it is viewed president obama squandered his chance to work with democrats early on? guest: people look back at the time has passed and look back as president obama's first term and see that he accomplished a lot. latinos are upset he did not aggressively pursue immigration reform, but he inherited a terrible situation. he did get the big stimulus package in history through congress. he got health care reform through. there is a lot of other things. the lilly ledbetter act. dodd-frank.

those are major pieces of legislation. and i think if president obama was speaking frankly, he would say i did a lot and cannot do everything. and i lost my pejorative. -\ host: season and thus it -- cspan is at american university in northwest d.c.. in a little bit we will hear from some of the students. first up, philip greenwich, a student. go ahead. >> my question deals with the second term. president obama is often considered a policy wonk. i wondered if we will see big policy goes through, or expect him to be more political?

do we expect him to go to for more seats in the house? will he be more political and a second term? guest: there was an interview with a newspaper editorial board. he asserts himself in the tradition of ronald reagan, one who has a profound impact on big things, accomplishing big things. he did health care reform. for the second term, his question is will he be able to do big things? there is the vesco cliff issue -- fiscal cliff issue and entitlement reform, which will be a big deal the matter who wins. i think immigration reform is

something he is expected to tackle and very much wants to tackle. if mitt romney loses, it will mean he did not win much of the hispanic vote. he will not win much of the hispanic vote in either case, but he will have lost a big. i think the republican party, a lot of major leaders in the party already know they have to change the way they talk about immigration issues before they can even get latino voters to listen to them on other things. i think there could be an opening on immigration reform. obama would like to build a bigger majority for the second half of his second term, but i think he is most interested in adding more to his legacy than scoring political points. host: jana in new orleans. democrats line. caller: good morning. i am a registered democrat. i am a registered voter and have already voted. i question is, what can

president obama do differently when on day one he was met with the republican obstructionism. mitch mcconnell, erick kanter, and john painter and others. -- eric cantor. mitt romney did not work with democrats in massachusetts to the point that he had a separate elevator to avoid them. he has not done any interviews or disclose any taxes. talk about president obama since we spoke of mitt romney in the last segment. can you address the issue of reality of working with a divided congress? guest: exactly. there is been talk about how polarized the congress is. we even currently have eight

senators working together quietly on these grand bargain issues, fiscal issues. so it is not like there is nobody in the middle. it is a small middle. i think looking objectively at how the republicans have behaved and president obama has the age, i think both sides could do better. and president obama is an similar to mitt romney. they're both kind of aloof. they are not backslapping kind of politicians. president obama is not a people person. mitt romney is within his own family. i am from massachusetts and cannot imagine him going into the statehouse and talking it up with the democrats. back to obama, i think he would

try harder. people have complained he likes to play golf. how many times have the played golf with john boehner? we might see more golf, phone calls try to work things out. and john boehner also likes to make deals. i think mitch mcconnell would be willing to go along if they were feeling from the caucuses they could try to do some work with the president. host: a tweet from mr. joshua p. sharing his opinion on twitter. going out to american university to hear from another student. madison more joins us. good morning. caller: do you think is

a lot have lived up to expectations he set for himself in 2008? guest: to a certain degree all presidents learn on the job. there is no way to prepare for the enormity of the presidency. president obama came in with no executive experience. i think he is a student. he likes to read. by the accounts we have heard from, from people inside the white house, he is very crisp in meetings. he is very punctual. he likes to hear our views. he is interested in hearing from people who agree with him and do not agree with him. he takes the information and makes the decision.

i think that is also how mitt romney would operate if he were president, by the way. mitt romney has a lot more executive experience than president obama. -- a lot mor executive experiencguest: president obamas based a lot of criticism for being in stealer. he is valarie jarrett at his side. she is a minister without portfolio. she has access to her grief that are named. really she is just all longtime aide who worked very closely with him. president obama is known of for not giving much of his cabinet much of the time of day. he has his inner cabinet people like timothy geithner, hillary clinton, eric holder.

the other people not so much. in terms of who we might see in a second term, we know hillary clinton wants to leave. the question is whether it is john kerry or susan rice, secretary of state. i think likely given the problems over the benghazi attack, i would say john kerry. leon panetta would like to stay on i am told. timothy geithner definitely is leaving. in terms of who takes the position, there are a lot of possibilities. i think barack obama is interested in bringing someone into the inner circle with a business background. he definitely need that. irskin bowels might come in. he was the chief of staff under bill clinton.

he and alan simpson free of the debt and deficit commission. this is the document president obama famous we thank him for and put it on the shelf and did not do much with it. host: american universities did it come isabelle rhoda joins us now. caller: mayor bloomberg endorsed president obama. many liberals would say he has not played a strong enough role. do you believe president obama will be a stronger leader in environmental policy? guest: this is definitely something that should have mentioned before, climate change. this is something he has said previously that he wants to pursue more vigorously in the second term. i think that's -- the question is, will there be time? the second half of the second

term is notoriously and productive. he probably has 18 months after an inauguration and then we get it to mid-terms and full-on politics. i am not sure given where the republicans are on cap and trade, which the house passed and then went nowhere, i am not sure we will get anywhere, but we might see president obama talking more about the environment and energy issues. host: linda feldman has recent pieces looking at what the presidency under mitt romney will look like. under what it would look like from president obama. she writes this --

guest: right. exactly. the fiscal and sustainability we're in the middle of, especially over entitlements, that is just huge. i think the president will feel this is definitely something he will tackle the the second term. in researching these pieces it struck me how destructive this campaign has been. either men have talked about what they will do. they talked in very broad terms. they say they care about that and that is it, but they do not tell us what they will do. i suspect that is because they would do things that are very unpopular. hear from ryan on the independent line.

caller: i want to talk about obama putting tariffs on ties and solar panels. he ran in 2008 and was all about we're going to get all kinds of jobs in the solar industry. china and the shipping him here. he put tariffs on everything? we need to put tariffs on everything. that will create jobs. guest: president obama believes in free trade. if we start putting tariffs on things, then the chinese put tariffs on things, and then you get into a trade war and no one wins. i am not an expert on trade, so i cannot comment any more, but in -- except in very specific cases, he is not willing to go there. caller: good morning.

the recent disaster recovery can allow us to see bipartisanship with cris christie and president obama. i am curious to see whether that what effect on voters. guest: that is an interesting question. a mitt romney voter will not say he is working with chris christie during of very big catastrophe that suddenly he will vote for president obama, even though chris christie was the keynote speaker at the convention. i think probably the biggest impact of that event was it halted the romney's momentum and took him out of the conversation. everything was focused on what government was going to do to help the victims of the superstar. i think the visual was as a important as anything. the republican governor very outspoken critic of president obama.

he talked to him on the phone six times already. it told us a lot about chris christie, but also showed obama at his best, which is when obama -- when a lot of people are in istress, that he is mr. calm and knows how to deploy the assets of a government to help people. host: this is by the romney campaign talking about leadership. >> if most americans believe we're heading in the wrong direction. tired of this -- deficit, higher unemployment. >> you cannot change washington from the inside. to go he says he's only had four years. that is what mitt romney needed. he cut unemployment, turned it up as a rainy day fund.

host: the mitt romney campaign criticism of president obama. guest: it is interesting come of it wrongly says he says he needs four more years to finish the job. a lot of people agree with this. people are not happy with the direction of the country, not even necessarily happy with president obama, but they continue to say he inherited a situation that he did not create and they blame former president bush more than president obama for the state of the economy. i think of president obama is reelected, then i think that will be a very large part of the story that he inherited an year great depression, and at least we did not go there. host: american state university student joins us now. ryan's family, go ahead. -- ryan stanley.

caller: it has been one of the most negative seasons ever. what does this say about the candidates character, and or the way it will govern when they are in office? th guest: this is my fifth presidential election, and there are times when i have felt like the little girl in colorado who was driven to tears over all the talk about barack obama and mitt romney. this is the first presidential election since citizens united ruled on the case. -- the supreme court ruled on the case. i think we will see an analysis of what that meant. this has been 90% negative. this is how politics works.

negative advertisements run because their work. they successfully demonized mitt romney over the summer before he was able to get his feet on the ground campaigning it did not adequately respond. unfortunately i think one of the lessons will be a negative campaign is a work in which you another term in office. host: next up is an american university student joining us this morning. talking to them by skype. caller: my question is what parking zande affecting many parts of new york, especially long island and staten island, do you feel as though many voters will stay home and this

could possibly help mitt romney with the popular vote? guest: i do not know what will happen with the election. i know there has been talk about improvising in terms of letting people vote by e-mail, allowing people to vote for they live. i am not sure. i would assume this storm hit proportionately the same number of republicans and democrats, as though i do not know it takes out one more than the other as a percentage. i do not know -- it certainly will not change the outcome in any of the states that were hit. host: morrison, tennessee. christie joins us on the republicans line. caller: good morning. i have a question for you. we all know as americans

whether we're democratic or republican. i am a political science major at my state college. i know a little bit about the dynamics of how politics works at an elementary level. you say in your article that obama would be willing to cut deals with republicans possibly. why, if he was elected in 2008, and we no republicans voted for him, why did he listen to the voices in congress on the republican side, and why does he pushed through a health care reform act that all of us as americans feel so strongly about? president obama would show a partition there we would not be where we are now. -- what a show partisanship

then, we would not be where we are now. guest: not quite fair to say everyone hates obama care, because a lot of americans like it. if you dial back to the first two years of the presidency, he had big majorities in congress. if he had not fought for everything and what he wanted to do, the left would have -- there were already unhappy with the compromises that he may going in. the things he did not fight for such of the public option. as much as conservatives are extremely 0 -- unhappy with obama care, i think a lot of people on the left see obama care as a compromise. he had the big majorities. he got what he could get. he was able to make it pass by the skin of its teeth with the

60 vote senate's -- senate. he said he tried to work with republicans but was not able to get very far. host: student at american university joining us now with the question for linda feldman. -- feldmann. caller: do you think obama is foreign policy held improve the image abroad or just another tool to enter for the conflict? guest: i am not sure i follow your question. tommy more about what you mean. caller: in recent conflicts such as those in egypt and libya we saw the president rather than simply propping up leaders the u.s. formally agreed with cover to go along with the protest movement on the ground. the you think this help the u.s. image or the best to look on

this as for their entry complex for our own game? the way i saw things is we stuck with mubarak for awhile. i think this is president obama trying not to become embroiled in situations abroad where he debts that have to, but when things get to a point where you have to insert -- assert himself, he will. host: right wing on twitter as if obama has apologized for leaving our ambassador and guards to die? what has the incident there, the death of those american citizens revealed about president obama's foreign-policy leadership? guest: that is a really tough situation. i have been worth all we the campaign than the twists and turns of what has been

happening. that has not gotten a lot of coverage in some of the media. fox news has been pounding on that hard. i think what we're seeing -- i think we will get some fuller answers after the election. i think the administrative is not interested in talking whole lot about that before the election. host: jacksonville, florida. independent calller. patricia. caller: i have three points i want to make. the first point is no matter who wins on tuesday, mitt romney has already won because he has drawn attention to the mormon church that has become not a cult in any more, but he is already one. the second point is that how can

anyone vote for anyone who is flipping and flopping on every issue that he says? k is lwho do you thin ki ying? caller: he has lied about the fact that he was the -- how do you say, that he was the one -- he lied a lot about the president. he said many things about the president, of a company. that was not true. we also all that. companies themselves came out and said it was not true. the third point i have is that how can we as a christian nation say it is a cold and the next day it is not a cold?

host: talking about organism and christians -- mormonism and christian saying it is not a cult. guest: i do not know what to say. host: allen, independent line. caller: i am a 24-year navy veteran, so i know little bit about leadership. what i have seen from president obama, nationally, domestically, internationally. he does -- needs of the four years to get the jobs done. host: going on to his do it. joining us from american university, alice hill bribrand. caller: during the election

season president obama has appealed to women voters for women's reproductive rights. if he is reelected, the you think he will continue to support women's reproductive rights without the stress of reelection? guest: yes, i do. i think that is an easy one for him. he has always been a strong supporter of women's reproductive rights. i see no reason for him to switch. host: charles in atlanta. caller: i would like to know if the reporters know anything about why they will not release the cause of medicare. i have been calling ever since the cost of by operation. so security and medicare told me they cannot release the figures until after the election. i wish someone would at least tell the seniors tonight or tomorrow or even to c-span how

much the cost of part b will be under obama. i wanted to vote for it, but i changed my mind and went to republicans. i will hang up and wait. think abouto you the health care law? caller: i think it is terrible. my doctor has already put me aside. my last appointment for my doctor was going to be the 12th of december. after that, i have to find another one. i have made arrangements for them to see me, because you have to go when it and wait five or six hours for a doctor to be available. this is the way i'm going to have to live for the next two years.

guest: i certainly cannot answer your question about medicare, i am sorry. the availability of doctors is a huge question that people have once obama care is implemented. we will have to wait and see. that is all i can say. host: anna sutton joining us now. good morning. caller: i have personally worked reelection events for the president. president obama is seen to lead the campaign differently than in the past. do you think it will have an effect on how campaigns are run in the future? guest: i am not sure his work as a community organizer would have an impact on how campaigns are run in the future, but i think what we're seeing right now is a very sophisticated ground game,

and every cycle you have new innovations. they are technologically- oriented. they can lycra target down to the person. the get go house to house and know a lot about the people they try to reach out to. i think it is not just president obama. it is the campaign team. i think it will get a lot of credit for being super organized and gave me out what they need to be do -- what they need to do. david axelrod said after the last debate, we've been planning for the past few weeks for the past two years. host: obama games shares his opinion on twitter -- he says obama is glue is.

can the presidency and what his experience was. our final american universities do it now. joining us from american university. go ahead. caller: good morning. at the beginning of the show you talked about obama is bipartisan effort and what members of congress will try to do to make progress. what out of like to know is what do you think they will be able to get done, or will it does be more deadlock? think there is a very large chance we get a lot of gridlock. i know which is frustrates people. a lot of people want them to get something done. if you look at what people want, conservatives want one thing, locals want -- conservatives want something else. i am not sure -- someone will lose tomorrow. the losers might take a little

while to regroup and figure out where they're going to go. i almost tend to think we will not get anything done until it is absolutely necessary. the government will shut down, then they can get something done. host: think you to american university for talking to us. linda feldmann, the key to you for talking about the governing style of president obama. >> we of war road to the white house coverage coming up tonight campaign rallies. they are scheduled to start just before 11:00 eastern. --we have more road to the white house coverage. president obama wrapping up in iowa . the ap reported irani will

campaign evens in ohio. president obama will spend the night in chicago. we've not heard if he will add campaign even as tomorrow. we will have coverage of the president in chicago. victory in concession speeches from candidates, plus your reaction throughout the night starts at 8:00 eastern far night. a quick reminder the republican vice-presidential candidate paul ryan is making his final campaign stop in colorado today. he is expected to speak of the johnson corner truck stop in johnston town, colorado. mitt romney attended his last colorado campaign rally in inglewood on saturday night. this event today was a to start at 3:35, but running a little

bit behind. right now, a look at some of the house races in tomorrow's election. host: the deputy editor for the rothenberg political report. the house in general, what are you looking at? >> right now the most likely scenario is a democrats picked up a handful of seats, but no where near the 25 seats they would need to restore the of the policy as the speaker of the house. there are couple of big factors in that, one of them is redistricting. they did key -- a good job of making a tougher takeover target and pulling them off the map, of the bottle ground up. the other challenge is the aircraft are playing defense. they have a number of vulnerable republicans. then it becomes a game of they might defeat a republican member of congress, but they might lose one of their own. all they have done is broken

even instead of breaking into the 25 seats to gain. >> talking about individual races. i want to begin with upstate new york. try to preserve a democratic seat in new york 27. >> she is revered. she is well-loved and the democratic party because of the special election win, but now facing a more republican district that she faced before. she's busy chris collins who could be a polarizing figure, but he wears that as a badge of honor. right now i think the republican nature of the district is probably dragging her down, even though she might be the war personable candidates in the race. hos>> alan west, try to keep his seat for a second term. to go out and west running against patrick murphy. this is one of the most

expensive, nastiest encloses races of the country. i think that the district by the numbers is very competitive, but alan west is tenacious. right now he is running three times the amount of television advertisements and normal can get it would run at this stage. even though he is polarizing, he is also strategic. this is a former military officer. patrick murphy has a tough task in coming across the line over west. >> interesting race in utah. mia love, a republican, raised getting a lot of attention. >> jim matheson, democrats regard him as a survivor. i think that republicans did not really target him. they did not spend a lot of money trying to defeat him in 2010, but this time they read through his district in running

against a very unconventional candidates. black conservative republican woman is tough to stereotype her as a typical politician. the other thing we have to remember is the wrong able be at the top of the ballot. i think we could see it wrong to get almost 70 percent of this district. that raises the threshold of the crossover votes that he needs to survive. he is very much in the game. third congressional district in about up. >> this is the type of district the democrats should be challenging and if they want to win a majority. this is a suburban district. places where democrats should be doing very well. right now democrats are having a tough time going after the democratic nominee. even though he has an

influential position in the state legislature, ads are talking about his record as a firefighter, not even mentioning the fact he's a politician, because that is not a label do want to have. right now heck of a vintage, but it democrats have a better night, they need to do better and this type of district. >> california is a solid blue states for the president, but a couple of interesting races. normally we can ignore the state. there have only been one or two chances of one party taking over the other. with this is a legislative redistricting district, the congressional map has been turned on its head. we're watching almost a dozen races in california. democrats need to almost we all of the competitive races that we

have in california in order to get even close to the 25. >> and a cut in danger. first of an airline. roscoe bartlett. he is a victim of redistricting. this covers all we got a telegram county, and the d.c. suburbs. he faces jauntily, somewhat of a surprise winner over a congressman. the new democratic nature i think will be tough for bartlett, even though the congressman bartlett has an environmental street to him that does not make him a typical republican. i think he is facing a very different market recount the electorate that is wealthy, intellectual, and i think they will be tough to keep republicans in the majority. >> the massachusetts, john t ierny getting a lot of

attention with offshore gambling and money that was made for he and his family. >> we believe he is now an underdog in the races for a couple of different reasons. he does have an ethical cloud surrounding his brothers and law, and his wife served time for misconduct. i think the ethics scandal. he is an openly gay republican who was not easily tied to the tea party label. republicans have run a good campaign. i think it would be a surprise now if he comes back to congress. >> the rematch in new hampshire one. >> he won. he defeated carol porter. new hampshire is the place to go

because it is a presidential battleground. both congressional districts are tossups. the first district and the second district court charlie bass is trying to hang on, and also, an open governor's race that is wide open and competitive as well. right now the congressional races are tossups, and i would not be surprised if they survived. to go what about pennsylvania 2012? -- what about pennsylvania 12? >> it is shocking we're not talking about more competitive races, not even talking about eastern pennsylvania where they are normally vulnerable. in western pennsylvania it is mark kris. he won a member verses' never primary against jason all wire. -- altmire. this is a republican district. just talking with democratic

strategist, they say the only thing keeping him in the race to johnstown base that could turn out. that is only thing keeping the base. >> what other races are you keeping an eye on? what others will be a bellwether election night? >> in nevada we talk about the third race -- their district, but the fourth district. he lost in the senate primary in 2010. that is the type of district democrats need to win in order to do well. overall i will be watching the seats that republicans favored or even lean republican. the reason why that is how far our are competitive list race democrats have to start winning

in defeating republican members in order to get close to the majority. for not winning the heavy -- heavily republican seats, that it will not enough. >> look of the big picture, the balance of power. look at where the president a strong comeback there romney is strong. will there be coattails for the house seats in state by state battles? >> i think the most impact we've seen from the presidential race has already happened. i know in talking to democrats that are running the races, that first debate was fundamentally important, not just because it shifted the presidential debate, but because it was a time when house candidates registered to go on television, try to prove a moderate credentials. that first debate polarize the electorate. it took the crossover voters and rushed over to the republican side. i think the president to raise,

i think it is important for both sides that the candidates of the race stays close, but i think the biggest impact may never happened a few weeks ago. >> nathan gonzales, the jury much. >> all right and making campaign stops today in reno, nev., des ohio., ohiiowa and also, johnstown, colorado. we will have up for you live what happens. until then, a look at competitive senate races from around the country. >> is a good tailor is a senior analyst for the rothenberg political report. let's talk about the senate, the big picture, the balance of power. what are we looking at the election night? >> i think if we look at the ratings, and most people when they look it was a very

different picture. coming into this democrats were defending twice as many seats as republicans and really felt like they had a very good chance to get the four or three seats they needed to put that. there were a couple of things that shifted the way we're looking at this in and out. first of all, republicans were thrown for a loop when olympia snowe did fired -- retired. that shrank the playing field. i think democrats also got some very good candidates in what should have been tough states for them and really forced republicans to have to step up the game. misery is a perfect example. -- missouri is the perfect example. when todd akin made the comments of the fallout from the comments were a fatal mistake for his campaign, and the fact that on his own he was not raising

money. he did not have the infrastructure needed it forced them to have to widen their field and look for other opportunities. our bottom line, our baseline is in no net change to a republican gain of three which means they can tie it and it will be dependent on who won the president. even a small game is another picture. >> let's talk about some of these individual races. >> maine is one where we're going to stay independent centers joined the ranks. for where is anxious king going to caucus. democrats have done this dance there. they have not supported their own candidates. she is not been able to get out a single digits.

the republicans fell in? could they sit down and boast of the charlie simmer and numbers were they needed to be? me saw a very similar thing happened and the 2010 governor's race. they have a baseline for this happen. angus king is very well liked them. now we have seen both sides have to go in and put money there. they were not boosting him. they were aiming at again summers. i think that he is likely headed there for the wind. >> clearly one of the most expensive and closely watched senate races. we carry all their debates.

they are showing that elizabeth warren is moving ahead slightly. >> we move this last week. we gave elizabeth warren a slight edge going in there. scott brown was not supposed to make a tensdense and this elect. the burden was even heavier. he needed to win well over a majority of independents in order to make this up. the polls are showing that is not meeting these base lines. he is going to fall just short. i think he deserves credit for making this a close race. his favorability remains very high. i think elizabeth warren should be considered a very slight favorite. >> to former governors -- two

former governors. >> they are very well known throughout the state. but they're talking about their time as governor. both parties, they thought like it was going to be a flip. when we saw obama and take a slight lead after the lead, at that some people -- some people decided to rethink this. we have seen a couple of polls that tim kaine was just a narrow edge. this'll be a very close margin. i think we will see very heavy

turnout. i think money is going to fall short in northern virginia. the genius to hold his own. at the end of the very close. >> let me ask about the democratic incumbents seeking re electing it. republicans are both targeting of ohio. >> commissioner was dumb lebow said these are presidential swing states. you're seeing romney pour a lot of money into these states. in the absence of a national wave which we have not seen, candidates and campaigns really matter. in ohio share from recognize that this is going to be a race early.

we have seen his favorability ratings under water. could romney boost him a couple of points? even if romney once the state, brown is likely to outperform him. the same mr. in florida. republicans and not think they have been running the right campaign. he was left standing after everyone else pulled out. he has a very well-known name. he is hoping to get some of this. he also saw the troops come in and save him. it could make of this money. there are very expensive media markets. we have not seen that happen. i believe he has a very mode

rate image. 2006 was supposed to be another year he ran against capt. and harris. i think he's gotten pretty lucky against opponents. >> money has not been a money for connecticut. what is the latest? >> i think republicans were very much enthuse. she should be credited for the best political makeovers and a while. it was a very good republican year. i think republicans wrote her off. i think that chris murphy has struggled statewide. she was able to take advantage of that. >> her campaign has completely retooled. she reinvents herself. she has had some good television ads.

murphy is making up the advantage where it needs to be. she is open a case like, but not a huge leak that democrats would like in connecticut. lead that democrats would like in connecticut. north dakota is an interesting one. it is one that if democrats have not gotten the right candidate, we would not be talking about it being as competitive. the democrat gets rave reviews on the trail. burke found himself under water for a bruising campaign for the house. he had to remake his image statewide. heidi's biggest problem is that

romney will probably win the state by 20 points. he will not win by double digits. it will be a close race. we give rick burke the edge. >> and tester? >> he has problems in a state like montana in getting above 50.

on election night, i would be watching to see how much the third-party candidate will be getting. i had one strategist tell me that the last last two states to be called in 2006 were montana and virginia. >> what is going to happen to claire mccaskill? >> democrats were handed the best gift of the cycle with todd akin's comments. she has had ads where rape

survivors talk about this. they are moving ads. if republicans were probably looking at this race, it would have been a huge gamble. scott brown distanced himself from todd akin. ultimately, too much damage has been done. mccaskillwill not win by double digits, will win. heller deserves credit for running what has been a good campaign. turnout turnout is the big question. we moved this race into our tilt republican category.

it has been a while since we have seen surveys outside of the margin. >> paul reilly and is holding a rally at a truck stop. the campaign bus just showed up. a moment ago he was waiting at the crowd appeared colorado is considered one of these swing state or a lecturer college votes are up for grabs. ♪

[playing "it's a long way to the top" by ac/dc] ♪ >> one more day. one more day. thank you so much. you are a great leader. thank you for what yet and for our state and country. -- you have done for our state and country. i want to thank you. i want to introduce you to my family, our daughter liza and my son charlie.

he is a little shy. janna.s sam and my wife deann you know where this is going. you know that we do not have to settle for four more years like these last four years. you know that in one day we can elect mitt romney as the next president of the united states it back on track. you know that. i got to meet a great hero last night, a real leader. he was coming up the airplane. i got to meet john elway last night. he reminded me the last time the packers and the progress went to the super bowl. we did broncos -0- broncos went

to the super bowl. he said he was behind us. i have to tell you. from traveling the state all around, i want to thank you. i want to thank you colorado because you care about your country. you know what build our country. usorrow you're going to help save our country. you can forecast is based on how the campaigns are coming to their conclusions. he can tell the course that either party wants to take our country. these are very serious times. they require a serious solutions' which mean serious leadership the president is

closing his campaign in a very small way. it is the incredible shrinking presidency and campaign. it is partly funny. he says you use a tactic to scare boat tours. if you do not have a record, the your opponent as someone you should run from. you have turn on your television. the guess is doing just that today? that is right. the other day he appealed to your vote by asking you to vote out of revenge. that is about as small and petty as it gets. i want to be really clear. mitt romney and i are seeking to earn your vote.

we're asking for your vote out of a love of your country. because we're asking you to do this, we feel morally obligated to give you the choice. we owe you solutions. here is what we are doing. we have run a campaign saying these are the principles we believe and. the principles that built this country. religious liberty. personal liberty. we believe in freedom and enterprise. we believe our federal government works for us and not the other way around. we're going to say here is how you apply these principles to

come up with these proven progress solutions. it stands in stark contrast to what we have had the last four years. president obama came in. he simply said that if the past the stimulus bill, hey buddy. truckers areat check great. he said of the past the stimulus bill would have 9 million jobs than we have today. he passed the stimulus. we had 34 months up 8% unemployment. it is tired when he took office. the 23 million people are still looking for work. people are living with less. he then said the stimulus is enough and i'm going to go fight

for obamacare. he spent 1.5 years of our time fighting for a government takeover of health care. then he proceeded with his war on coal and mining. he had another term i am scared what he would do next. in one more day we will deny him that extra term. this is why we are offering new solutions. we talk about this because we want to respect you by showing the solution so that when we win this election we have the mandate. we have the game plan.

we at the track record. we have a plan to get as out of the debt we are in -- beacditche are in. use the energy, fix our schools, grow more if things, sell them overseas,, as the budget, give our children and grandchildren a debt free nation. small businesses just like johnson corner, that they give us our jobs. they're the backbone of our economy. we stand with them. this is a moment where we are defining the mission and trajectory of our country. i see you bringing your kids out here today.

thank you. thank you been this little guy with a packers pact. the reason i say that is there is nothing stronger than a parent's love for their children. it is like your part is walking around in somebody else's body. we are at an inflection point. not only is the path we're on making it harder for people to get ahead, keeping people out to the middle class, making our paychecks stress less far because of energy prices and everything else, but we know without a doubt that we're giving this next generation a diminished future. we have never done that in this country before. this country has always been truthful to the american legacy of leading the next generation -- leading the next generation better off.

we know if we stay on this path, at this mountain of debt, at this crushing burden we know it will get our kids a lower living center. we also know that if that does not work. we know that freedom works. we know free enterprise works. we know the genius of our economy is our families, our small businesses, the people of our country. we have to get those priorities right. we can turn this that are around and get back on that path. -- right around and get us back on that path. we also know we have a man standing for election tomorrow that is a proven leader. you have seen the hundreds of millions of dollars up at trying to million mitt romney --

to trash mitt romney. we have seen through that. this is a man who has proven in all of his life's endeavors he is faithful. he's truthful. he turned around the economy in his own state. he turned around small businesses and made them successful. he is a republican governor of a democratic state. he did not demonize the democrats. he met with them every single monday. he got stuff done. he found common ground. he bounced the budget without raising taxes. unemployment went down. this is the kind of leader we will elect purity has proven dean knows how to do it. -- we will elect here yet he has proven he knows how to do it. -- we will select.

he has proven he knows how to do it. this is a state with the most beautiful horizon of them all. you get to see it over here. we all look at our own personal horizon here yet we all see the horizon for ourselves and our lives in kids -- horizon not here yet we all see the horizon for ourselves and our kids. this horizon is there for the taking because of our country. our country is as beautiful idea that recognizes that our rights come from future. the recognizes opportunity and that you can make the most of your life. nothing is standing in your way. we still have that country. why we are giving you these

principles is proof that we can get that back by electing mitt romney in ex-president of the united states. thank you very much. this is an election where fans can come together. we can do this. we love our freedoms. we love our communities. we love what makes this country great. we love you for giving us this freedom. thank you for that. it all on the field. the your family to the polls. talk to those people who thought hope and change sounds a good. let's wake up on wednesday morning knowing that we did

everything we could in colorado gave it all in my for freedom in this country and that we will elect mitt romney the next president of the united states. thank you for coming out to johnson corner. god bless you guys. one more day. thank you. [crowdin chanting "one more day"]

[no audio] >> the presidential and vice- presidential candidates are making their final pitch to the voters. supporters of president obama 202-585-3885, support 585-3886.lle 0202- you also see a rally by joe biden. virginia is also considered a

battleground state. we are going to start taking your calls. our first is from george. this is going every which way. i wish just wondering what this would be toward continuing toward this.

>> to the support now? >> romney. caller: i m france is calling for massachusetts. i am for obama. that is all this fighting against the democrats and republicans. we know of the republicans wanted obama out. they wanted him for a one-term president. they said no. they were not going to go with him at all. that is what this is about. >> we're now going to move to fort lauderdale. what do you have to say? >> i am a veteran.

my concern was how come president obama has not discussed the benghazi, at issue with libya. it bothers me that he would not get up and stand up. there is an honor code with in the military. i just fine he is misleading people. now they have completely shut down on any and information. it is really troubling. i keep waiting. tomorrow is election day. i'm leaning the other way because of that. i did not get anything to say. host: when do you make your decision? caller: i keep waiting for the president. and never hear him talk about it. the onetime romney tried to talk about it. he was shut down by the

commentator. she did not allow that to go forward. she took the side of the president without knowing the details. i think every day more details come out that seems like there's something very wrong going on. we are all adults. i thought the president owes us an explanation and he never gave it to us. host: susanna's calling for mitt romney. caller: good afternoon. i would like to stand in solidarity with most of the commons that the previous caller just made. i am the mother of two military sons. they both volunteered during

times of war. they deserve so much more than this commander and chief has been able to give them. there are so many issues that i think people are not aware of. if you are not in the military or do not have a loved one, you would not know about a lot of the things that go on such as people need jobs so we do not talk about much. if you watch the general channel a news you get the same old story all the time. i know what his favorite cookies are but most people do not understand the rules of engagement in afghanistan are against the united states soldiers. they will not be getting what they need. there are some horrible things going on that of being withheld from the american public. host: as could use some of supporting the president.

to someone supporting the president. could you move your television? caller: i can. is that good? host: i am still hearing you. we will move to our next call. cindy is calling on the others line. caller: i am from massachusetts. i am really wondering why the issue of food safety has not come up with either candidate. people are being in the fda. gmos have been tested.

i am really afraid for human helalth in this country. host: pretty plan to vote for? caller: the lesser of the two evils i guess is obama. he does have -- food safety is one of my issues. i grow my own. minnesota, ao to romney supporter. caller: i am from minneapolis. i have been an undecided vote.

at fannie mae and my decision. my vote is going to who i support. i am sending my support into romney. host: were you an early voter? caller: i did not. i am not an early voter. i have never taken this long to make a decision. host: why did you wait this long? caller: i am a native american. obama said that he opened of federal land. he did for oil and natural gas. those are the lands of the ancestors that belong to my

ancestors. host: our last call is from mike, an obama supporter. caller: thank you for the call. i want to put my support for barack obama. we were out there and got the early voting done. anything is possible. i am not saying president obama is perfect. he is not. i cannot trust what mitt romney says. i am retired. who i trust the most? host: you are from one of the state's considered one of the battleground states. what are you seeing there? what does the campaign been like?

caller: the campaign here has been brutal. florida is funny when it comes to the elections. to trust in the system. if you get out there in -- if you do not get out and vote you do not have a say so. if things are going wrong and you did not vote, you have nothing to say. there were a lot of missed devious things going on. the voting system is kind of funny. host: we will take more of your calls tonight and it got eastern leading up to the rallies tonight.

candidates took part in the debate a host of last my by the free foundation. this is moderated by larry king. we will have that for you at 630 p in eastern tonight on c-span. president obama and mitt romney's final rallies tonight. that is here on c-span starting at 11:00 eastern. tomorrow, watch the results of the presidential race. we will have coverage of president obama in chicago and mitt romney in boston. plus your reaction there of the night. >> joe biden and his wife held a

campaign rally. virginia has 13 electorial boats. >> hello. it is so nice to be here in virginia. i feel right at home. i am here teaching full time. i feel right at home. i came here today because i want to thank all of you. you have done so much for us and our campaign. we really do have the best team.

we have you. you will take this forward tomorrow. i would like to introduce my husband, our vice president, joe biden. >> how are you? i am joe biden. husband.l's i tell you what. i have been to lots of rallies this campaign. i have not had an order like this behind me. these are three of the finest leaders in the united states of america, all three of them. i mean it. this warner guy is so popular we are just hanging onto his coat. kaine worries me. everybody likes him.

i have been in the senate a long time. i have a reputation for saying exactly what i think. let me tell you what i think. this is one stand up man. i served a long man. i've never met anyone he is just great honorable as this man right here. i tell you what. i am so happy the economy will grow. at my living standards depend on it. first of all, how many of you are veterans or know someone who served in iraq or afghanistan?

we have talked it up this. we've all talked about it. one of the things as you wind down the campaign, we cannot lose sight of. we still have 68,000 warriors in afghanistan. all of us have been there multiple times. every morning i checked with the pentagon to find out just what price has been paid. when you're in the theater, and they will continue until there as a fallen angel. there are 6509 families to have

suffered a great deal. what made me think about it was hearing all my colleagues talk about how we have got to bring this country that together again. one of the things i found remarkable is none of the 50,000 that had been wounded, none of the 17,000 critically wounded, none of them ever asked the woman there next to if you are a democrat or republican. none of them ever engaged in anything, what is in the interest of their country. they are remarkable generation of warriors. this hit parts of virginia. in my home state of delaware,

parts of maryland. it really clobbered a jersey. every morning i will be on another call with the president where we speak with all the governors of those affected states. they are all acting together again. they are acting like when you and i got started in politics. the governor of delaware is a democrat. they are saying when asked what can you do, what you need he said i like to say to chris christie delaware has been hit. if you need anybody or any generators, you have been hit more than we have been hit. we will send them to you. the governor of connecticut saying the same thing. that is how people are

responding in this crisis. there is a great story. i'm the oldest guy up here. even probably tell that. alwayspatrick's day he has a party at his home. the last election he ran, he and ronald reagan were friends. he said this election i've lived next door. i making a name up.

he lived in a duplex. he said what i did every election night, at 730 i put on my topcoat and went away for the results do come in. he said it was called as usual. it was a joint staircase. he said happily f scheme that his group did have let up he met his neighbor of 20 years. -- he said happily at the met is a for a 20 years. but he said she looked at him and said you did not ask me. i am here to ask, of virginia. please, a vote.

during the next four years america has tremendous opportunity. we are so much better position than any nation in the world to be the leading economy. the greatest political system in the world. we viewed nine of our allies for the first time in the last five years. we have made real progress. companies have hired more workers in october than any time in the last eight months. exports are up 41%. no matter what the other team said, we did rescue the automobile industry. 200,000 new jobs.

we have extended the life of the trap by a eight years. we ended the war in iraq. we will and the war in afghanistan. we will create 1 million new manufacturing jobs. we are going to add 100,000 math and science teachers over the next 10 years. with our etiquette will drastically. -- we have already cut oil drastically. my wife's students will hear the word in sourcing more than outsourcing. we're going to give tax breaks for those who come home and not those that go abroad.

the american people have a decision to make. we can move forward to go back to the politics that thought is here in the first place. the differences are really stark. in my generation i cannot think of any election or the differences are more stark. we have four debates. i had one with the congressman. if you saw the last couple of debates you begin to wonder. they seem to be running away as fast as they can.

i am serious. it is like a kid trying to outrun their shadow. the only time there shadow catches up with them is when the sun goes down. it is going down tomorrow. did you see the foreign-policy debate with the president? i did not know whether romney was going to endorse a barack or debate him. he won from harshly criticizing him and are 49 allies -- he put from carson criticizing him and our 49 allies and sang it was a terrible mistake to saying he kind of agrees with the timeline.

i ask the same question to my colleagues. he said would guarantee that you'd be out by 2014. he used his favorite phrase 'it depends." it depends on how i feel. it depends on the weather. it always depends. the only thing you can be sure of is that it will change. i never seen a guy change position. he said look. he said this guy has changed so many times he will be a chief contortionists of stock to sell de soliel.que

i tell you what. on issues relating to women, cannot climb into the 21st century. they're stuck somewhere between 1956 and 1963. rights comes to women's there is a fundamental distinction among all of us in this stage. iraq and i believe that my daughter -- barack and i believe that my daughter and granddaughters are entitled to every single opportunity my sons have and grandsons have. no exception. it is that basic.

this is not just a position on foreign policies were attempting to rewrite the position. this new -- this is not your father's republican party. they are both decent man. they have such a fundamentally different values set that we do. they have been running on two parts of this economy. the first part is there is a $5 trillion tax cut.

he said it doesn't cost anything. they're not talking about it anymore. when asked to name one single exception they would cut for the wealthy, and they could not name one. now they're running away from it. the second plank is the house passed a budget. gov. romney said it was a marvelous budget. he said were the president he would sign it. that would be the law. the new york times when they

described it called it the most extreme budget plan passed by house of congress in modern times. even when i debated ryan, i have a six year old granddaughter. her name is madeline. she would say what happened? to casper the friendly ghost deal income? -- did casper the friendly ghost still its? it is the same budget that wants to privatize social security. they took that out of this budget. they will go back to it. it takes kids off a telegram. these guys are shameless. they walked away from the very thing they have been running on.

a lever can not change his spots. their policies have not changed. their economic policies are bush on steroids. massive tax cuts for the wealthy. letting things rewrite their own rules again. the wall street run wild. we have seen this before. we know how it ends. it ended with their great recession of 2008. too much is at stake for the american people. they are now adding on top of what they're running away from. they are doing anything they can to confuse the electorate.

gov. rumblinromney will do whate can no matter how much confusion he less so to do it -- sow to do it. they went from being against the automobile bailout to say they're for it in the first place. now they're trying to say the devil out of people from ohio. they are running an ad even though every single out that has pointed out it is a lie. they see what is going to happen is president obama wanted chrysler to go bankrupt so the italians could buy it and send all the jobs in china. i come from a state where the automobile industry is crash. we used to be the second largest per-capita state and delaware.

those people got crushed. in a higher they're coming back. tens of thousands of new jobs. look atable to turn and their kids and say it is going to be ok. dad or mom is that. they're getting the level doubles bill -- living double scared out of them. they have announced the romney as a country and a lie. when is the last time we have seen two major american corporations in the waning hours of the campaign go after a republican candidate? they're continuing to do it. they are shameless. the denver post said it best. here's what it said. beyond the act veracity is a

question about character. they went on to say to speak in to end their friends of the current -- to the occurrence of ohio's people appeared in the is a wholly untrue fall depression. my mommy's to have an expression. redo my mom used to have an expression. joey, their character is not determined by what you say when everyone is looking. your character is determined by what you do in say when no one is looking. ladies and gentlemen, we know what governor romney said when he thought no one was looking. 40 7% -- 47 % were not willing

to take responsibility for their own lives. where does it end? presidential elections are all about character. president obama has the character of his conviction. he does not engage. he does not mislead. he says what he means. he does it. we have absolute confidence in the american people. we are determined to level the playing field. there is no quict